Hi Stefan,
On 28.06.2016 19:20, Stefan Beller wrote:
>> I have the feeling that “git submodule update --depth 1” is less clever
>> than it could be. Here is one example I observed with git 2.0.0:
>
> 2.9.0 (as "Direct fetching of " is not part of 2.0.0 IIRC) ?
Yes, sorry. I had this tested with
change in library version. But not being able to get a
specific tag as a shallow submodule is a major showstopper here, I think.
Greetings,
Martin von Gagern
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
s a merge which only
modifies files unrelated to the submodules?
If there is no easy way to avoid this, do you think I should file a bug
report for this? After all, replacing a subdirectory by a submodule
shouldn't be that rare, and neither should be merges across such a
change. So in my opinion, g
code aborts instead.
So far my understanding. I'm not sure whether this kind of duplicate
resolution is something normal or indicates some breakage in the
repository in question. But aborting seems a bad solution in either case.
Greetings,
Martin von Gagern
--
To unsubscribe from this list: s
ssertion
indicates a problem with the program itself, not its input data.
Thank you very much,
Martin von Gagern
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
utomatically (or even manually?) generated unique names might be better
than none. But I'm not sure they are worth the trouble.
Martin von Gagern
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
This keeps texinfo 5.x happy. See https://bugs.gentoo.org/464210.
Signed-off-by: Martin von Gagern
---
Documentation/cat-texi.perl | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
diff --git a/Documentation/cat-texi.perl b/Documentation/cat-texi.perl
index dbc133c..b52660d 100755
--- a/Documentation/cat
7 matches
Mail list logo