Hi, On Mon, 26 May 2008, Mark Levedahl wrote: > Johannes Schindelin wrote: > > > You wrote: > > > > > As this commit is part of the published master branch, I am not sure > > > the correct resolution: leaving this commit in place means that any > > > commit between it and a commit fixing this will always cause an > > > error on Cygwin / Windows. Of course, it *is* on the published > > > master branch. > > > > That's the case for all regressions: we do not rewrite history for > > them. > > I understand that, and the reasons: however, as this leads to a long > sequence of commits pointing to *illegal* trees, not just trees with bad > code, a different policy might be in order here. Or, it might not. I fail to see how Cygwin is so special as to merit a falsification of history. > > As for the resolution, could you quickly try the 'my-next' branch of > > git://repo.or.cz/git/dscho.git? > > I can check that branch out, but don't get very far in the tests: > > *** t0004-unwritable.sh *** > * ok 1: setup > * FAIL 2: write-tree should notice unwritable repository Sorry. Was worth a try. > I don't have access to a linux box today, so I can't manipulate master > to find if that branch with your patch would work right now. Sure you can. You should be able to "git mv t/t5100/nul t/t5100/nul-file" and then editing t/t5100-*.sh to refer to nul-file instead of nul. Hth, Dscho -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
