Hi, On Sun, 7 Dec 2008, Alexander Gavrilov wrote: > On Wednesday 26 November 2008 20:08:54 Johannes Schindelin wrote: > > On Wed, 26 Nov 2008, Michael J Gruber wrote: > > > Looking at the source I suspect that fast-export fails to denote > > > parenthood in the case of yet unmarked parents (last for-loop of > > > handle_commit() in builtin_fast_export.c). But I don't really know > > > that code at all. > > > > I strongly doubt so. Noticed the use of has_unshown_parent(commit) in > > both cases before calling handle_commit()? > > > > In any case, here is a script that I wrote _long_ time ago, to be able > > to reconstruct history from the output of "git rev-list --all > > --parents". Maybe this helps you in reconstructing something that is > > handled incorrectly by fast-export | fast-import, but is lighter than > > a full-blown repository. > > Today I had time to investigate this problem, and found: > > 1) The root of the problem is that fast-export really wants to walk > revisions in topological order, but actually receives them in date > order. Indeed. Can you submit this patch with a proper commit message, adding a test for the issue by setting a bogus GIT_COMMITTER_DATE explicitly? Thanks, 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
