Re: Hash algorithm analysis

2018-07-23 Thread demerphq
On Mon, 23 Jul 2018 at 14:48, Sitaram Chamarty wrote: > On 07/23/2018 06:10 PM, demerphq wrote: > > On Sun, 22 Jul 2018 at 01:59, brian m. carlson > > wrote: > >> I will admit that I don't love making this decision by myself, because > >> right now, wh

Re: Hash algorithm analysis

2018-07-23 Thread demerphq
On Sun, 22 Jul 2018 at 01:59, brian m. carlson wrote: > I will admit that I don't love making this decision by myself, because > right now, whatever I pick, somebody is going to be unhappy. I want to > state, unambiguously, that I'm trying to make a decision that is in the > interests of the Git

Re: could `git merge --no-ff origin/master` be made more useful?

2018-05-15 Thread demerphq
On 15 May 2018 at 00:58, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: > > On Mon, May 14 2018, demerphq wrote: > >> The first time I tried to use --no-ff I tried to do something like this: >> >> git checkout master >> git commit -a -m'whatever' >> git comm

could `git merge --no-ff origin/master` be made more useful?

2018-05-14 Thread demerphq
The first time I tried to use --no-ff I tried to do something like this: git checkout master git commit -a -m'whatever' git commit -a -m'whatever2' git merge --no-ff origin/master and was disappointed when "it didn't work" and git told me there was nothing to do as the branch was up to da

Re: [Problem] test_must_fail makes possibly questionable assumptions about exit_code.

2018-03-01 Thread demerphq
On 1 March 2018 at 16:08, Jeff King wrote: > On Thu, Mar 01, 2018 at 09:28:31AM -0500, Randall S. Becker wrote: > >> > It's not clear to me though if we just want to tweak the programs run in >> > the >> > test scripts in order to get test_must_fail to stop complaining, or if we >> > consider the

Re: [Problem] test_must_fail makes possibly questionable assumptions about exit_code.

2018-03-01 Thread demerphq
On 1 March 2018 at 08:36, Jeff King wrote: > On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 05:51:14PM +0100, demerphq wrote: > >> I would look into putting it into a module and then using the PERL5OPT >> environment var to have it loaded automagically in any of your perl >> scripts. >> &

Re: [Problem] test_must_fail makes possibly questionable assumptions about exit_code.

2018-02-28 Thread demerphq
On 28 February 2018 at 18:19, demerphq wrote: > On 28 February 2018 at 18:10, Randall S. Becker > wrote: >> On February 28, 2018 11:46 AM, demerphq wrote: >>> On 28 February 2018 at 08:49, Jeff King wrote: >>> > On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 07:42:51AM +, Eric

Re: [Problem] test_must_fail makes possibly questionable assumptions about exit_code.

2018-02-28 Thread demerphq
On 28 February 2018 at 18:10, Randall S. Becker wrote: > On February 28, 2018 11:46 AM, demerphq wrote: >> On 28 February 2018 at 08:49, Jeff King wrote: >> > On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 07:42:51AM +, Eric Wong wrote: >> > >> >> > > > a) We coul

Re: [Problem] test_must_fail makes possibly questionable assumptions about exit_code.

2018-02-28 Thread demerphq
On 28 February 2018 at 15:55, Randall S. Becker wrote: > On February 28, 2018 2:49 AM, Peff wrote: >> On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 07:42:51AM +, Eric Wong wrote: >> >> > > > > a) We could override the meaning of die() in Git.pm. This feels >> > > > > ugly but if it works, it would be a very s

Re: [Problem] test_must_fail makes possibly questionable assumptions about exit_code.

2018-02-28 Thread demerphq
On 28 February 2018 at 08:49, Jeff King wrote: > On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 07:42:51AM +, Eric Wong wrote: > >> > > > a) We could override the meaning of die() in Git.pm. This feels >> > > > ugly but if it works, it would be a very small patch. >> > > >> > > Unlikely to work since I think w

Re: RFC v3: Another proposed hash function transition plan

2017-09-14 Thread demerphq
On 14 September 2017 at 17:23, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > Hi Junio, > > On Thu, 14 Sep 2017, Junio C Hamano wrote: > >> Jonathan Nieder writes: >> >> > In other words, a long lifetime for the hash absolutely is a design >> > goal. Coping well with an unexpectedly short lifetime for the hash is

Re: Bug: git branch --unset-upstream command can nuke config when disk is full.

2017-09-13 Thread demerphq
On 13 September 2017 at 17:22, Jeff King wrote: > On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 05:18:56PM +0200, demerphq wrote: > >> > Hmph. That is very disturbing. But with that information I should be >> > able to track down the culprit. Thanks for digging

Re: Bug: git branch --unset-upstream command can nuke config when disk is full.

2017-09-13 Thread demerphq
On 13 September 2017 at 16:51, Jeff King wrote: > On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 04:49:45PM +0200, demerphq wrote: > >> On 13 September 2017 at 16:17, Jeff King wrote: >> > You're welcome to read over the function to double-check, but I just >> > looked it over and

Re: Bug: git branch --unset-upstream command can nuke config when disk is full.

2017-09-13 Thread demerphq
On 13 September 2017 at 16:17, Jeff King wrote: > You're welcome to read over the function to double-check, but I just > looked it over and couldn't find any unchecked writes. I can look, but I doubt I would notice something you did not. On the other hand the strace output does show that this is

Re: RFC v3: Another proposed hash function transition plan

2017-09-13 Thread demerphq
On 13 September 2017 at 14:05, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > For example, I am still in favor of SHA-256 over SHA3-256, after learning > some background details from in-house cryptographers: it provides > essentially the same level of security, according to my sources, while > hardware support seem

Re: Bug: git branch --unset-upstream command can nuke config when disk is full.

2017-09-13 Thread demerphq
On 13 September 2017 at 14:34, Jeff King wrote: > On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 01:59:17PM +0200, demerphq wrote: > >> After being away for a while I saw the following message in one of my git >> repos: >> >> $ git status >> On branch yves/xxx >> Your bra

Bug: git branch --unset-upstream command can nuke config when disk is full.

2017-09-13 Thread demerphq
After being away for a while I saw the following message in one of my git repos: $ git status On branch yves/xxx Your branch is based on 'origin/yves/xxx', but the upstream is gone. (use "git branch --unset-upstream" to fixup) nothing to commit, working tree clean $ git branch --unset-upstream

Re: your mail

2017-06-22 Thread demerphq
On 22 June 2017 at 23:58, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: > +You don't need to be subscribed to the list to send mail to it, and > +others on-list will generally CC you when replying (although some > +forget this). It's adviced to subscribe to the list if you want to be FWIW: "adviced" is misspel

Re: Unaligned accesses in sha1dc

2017-06-02 Thread demerphq
On 2 June 2017 at 22:14, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: > On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 10:11 PM, Martin Ågren wrote: >> On 2 June 2017 at 21:32, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: >>> On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 11:49 AM, Martin Ågren >>> wrote: On 2 June 2017 at 10:51, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: >

Re: Unaligned accesses in sha1dc

2017-06-02 Thread demerphq
On 2 June 2017 at 21:32, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: > On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 11:49 AM, Martin Ågren wrote: >> On 2 June 2017 at 10:51, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: >>> On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 2:15 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote: Martin Ågren writes: > I looked into this some more.

Re: Git 2.13.0 segfaults on Solaris SPARC due to DC_SHA1=YesPlease being on by default

2017-06-01 Thread demerphq
On 16 May 2017 at 00:09, Jeff King wrote: > On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 04:13:58PM +0200, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: > >> On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 3:58 PM, Marc Stevens wrote: >> > Hi Aevar, >> > >> > Thank you for notifying us of this issue. >> > Big endianness is a tricky issue, also since I don

Re: PCRE v2 compile error, was Re: What's cooking in git.git (May 2017, #01; Mon, 1)

2017-05-09 Thread demerphq
On 9 May 2017 at 13:12, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: > On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 2:37 AM, brian m. carlson > wrote: >> On Tue, May 09, 2017 at 02:00:18AM +0200, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: > * gitweb is vulnerable to CPU DoS now in its default configuration. > It's easy to provide an ERE that e

Re: Feature request: --format=json

2017-04-18 Thread demerphq
On 18 April 2017 at 10:44, Fred .Flintstone wrote: > Well the easiest way to work with that would be JSON. > So the best would be if Git could output the data I want in JSON format. > Then it would be easy for me to work with data. > > With git rev-list and git-cat file, its not so easy to reliabl

Re: Will OpenSSL's license change impact us?

2017-03-25 Thread demerphq
On 25 March 2017 at 17:35, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: > On Sat, Mar 25, 2017 at 10:43 AM, demerphq wrote: >> >> >> On 25 Mar 2017 10:18 a.m., "Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason" >> wrote: >> >> On Sat, Mar 25, 2017 at 9:40 AM, demerphq wrote: >&

Re: Will OpenSSL's license change impact us?

2017-03-25 Thread demerphq
On 25 March 2017 at 00:51, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: > They're changing their license[1] to Apache 2 which unlike the current > fuzzy compatibility with the current license[2] is explicitly > incompatible with GPLv2[3]. Are you sure there is an issue? From the Apache page on this: Apache 2

Re: send-email garbled header with trailing doublequote in email

2016-11-03 Thread demerphq
On 3 November 2016 at 15:18, Jeff King wrote: > On Wed, Nov 02, 2016 at 11:29:01PM +0100, Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > >> So this must be postfix then that out of the blue decided to garble it >> in a strange way while parsing the input... The removal of all >> whitespaces s/what ever/whatever/ espec

Re: git add without whitespace

2016-05-31 Thread demerphq
On 30 May 2016 at 21:06, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Robert Dailey writes: > >> $ git diff -U0 -w --no-color | git apply --cached --ignore-whitespace >> --unidiff-zero >> >> This command explicitly leaves out context because it can sometimes >> cause the patch to fail to apply, I think due to whitesp

Re: t6044 broken on pu

2016-05-08 Thread demerphq
On 8 May 2016 at 20:20, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Torsten Bögershausen writes: > >> May a simple >> printf "1\n2\n3\n4\n5\n6\n7\n8\n9\n10\n" >> >> be an option ? > > If you were to do that, at least have the decency to make it more > readable by doing something like: > > printf "%s\n" 1 2

Re: best practices against long git rebase times?

2015-12-04 Thread demerphq
On 4 December 2015 at 18:28, John Keeping wrote: > On Fri, Dec 04, 2015 at 06:09:33PM +0100, demerphq wrote: >> On 4 December 2015 at 16:05, Andreas Krey wrote: >> > Hi all, >> > >> > our workflow is pretty rebase-free for diverse reasons yet. >> > &g

Re: best practices against long git rebase times?

2015-12-04 Thread demerphq
On 4 December 2015 at 16:05, Andreas Krey wrote: > Hi all, > > our workflow is pretty rebase-free for diverse reasons yet. > > One obstacle now appearing is that rebases simply take > very long - once you might want to do a rebase there are > several hundred commits on the remote branch, and our t

Re: XDL_FAST_HASH can be very slow

2014-12-22 Thread demerphq
(sorry for the repost, I use gmail and it send html mails by default). On 22 December 2014 at 11:48, Thomas Rast wrote: > > 1. hash function throughput > 2. quality of the hash values > 3. avoiding collision attacks > > XDL_FAST_HASH was strictly an attempt to improve throughput, and fairly > succ

Re: [GSoC14][RFC] Is there any interest in adding a port of checkpatch.pl to contrib/?

2014-03-19 Thread demerphq
On 18 March 2014 02:38, Jacopo Notarstefano wrote: > 3. As far as I can tell, checkpatch needs to be run from the root > folder of a linux repository clone. Cloning several hundred MBs for a > single perl script looks a little foolish to me. If that is your worry maybe you should upload the scrip

Re: question about: Facebook makes Mercurial faster than Git

2014-03-10 Thread demerphq
On 10 March 2014 11:07, Dennis Luehring wrote: > according to these blog posts > > http://www.infoq.com/news/2014/01/facebook-scaling-hg > https://code.facebook.com/posts/218678814984400/scaling-mercurial-at-facebook/ > > mercurial "can" be faster then git > > but i don't found any reply from the

Re: Confusing git log --- First time bug submission please advise on best practices

2014-02-07 Thread demerphq
On 7 February 2014 18:26, Duy Nguyen wrote: > On Fri, Feb 07, 2014 at 09:43:46AM +, Francis Stephens wrote: >> Thanks for your clear response. I can see where I went wrong now. > > Maybe something like this would help avoid confusion a bit in the > future? This toy patch puts a horizontal line

Re: Rebase triggers "git diff header lacks filename information" on very large patch with binary files

2014-01-14 Thread demerphq
On 14 January 2014 12:48, demerphq wrote: > Hi, > > I just did a rebase, and it throws an error like this: > > Applying: comment1 > Applying: comment2 > Applying: comment3 > Applying: comment4 > Applying: patch_with_binary_files > fatal: git diff header lacks filena

Rebase triggers "git diff header lacks filename information" on very large patch with binary files

2014-01-14 Thread demerphq
Hi, I just did a rebase, and it throws an error like this: Applying: comment1 Applying: comment2 Applying: comment3 Applying: comment4 Applying: patch_with_binary_files fatal: git diff header lacks filename information when removing 1 leading pathname component (line 7330213) Repository lacks nec

Re: [Administrivia] On ruby and contrib/

2013-06-06 Thread demerphq
On 5 June 2013 16:45, Felipe Contreras wrote: > On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 7:04 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > That might make sense for the shorter term, but in longer term I see > Perl as declining in favor of other languages. It's only a matter of > time before Ruby surpasses Perl in popularity, and

Re: git ate my home directory :-(

2013-03-26 Thread demerphq
On 26 March 2013 18:48, Jeff King wrote: > On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 06:20:09PM +0100, demerphq wrote: > >> Seconded. At $work lots of people started asking anxious questions >> about this. It was suggested it is a potential security hole, although >> I am not sure I agr

Re: git ate my home directory :-(

2013-03-26 Thread demerphq
On 26 March 2013 18:06, Richard Weinberger wrote: > P.s: I've told this story to some friends and co-workers which use git like > me very day. > All of them were shocked about the behavior of git-clean and GIT_DIR. Seconded. At $work lots of people started asking anxious questions about this. It

Re: inotify to minimize stat() calls

2013-02-10 Thread demerphq
On 10 February 2013 12:17, Duy Nguyen wrote: > Bear in mind though this is Linux, where lstat is fast. On systems > with slow lstat, these timings could look very different due to the > large number of lstat calls compared to open+getdents. I really like > to see similar numbers on Windows. Is wi

Re: CodingGuidelines Perl amendment

2013-02-06 Thread demerphq
On 6 February 2013 19:35, Ted Zlatanov wrote: > On Wed, 6 Feb 2013 19:25:43 +0100 demerphq wrote: > > d> On 6 February 2013 19:05, Ted Zlatanov wrote: >>> On Wed, 06 Feb 2013 08:29:30 -0800 Junio C Hamano wrote: >>> > JCH> Is it ever (as opposed to &

Re: CodingGuidelines Perl amendment

2013-02-06 Thread demerphq
On 6 February 2013 19:05, Ted Zlatanov wrote: > On Wed, 06 Feb 2013 08:29:30 -0800 Junio C Hamano wrote: > > JCH> Is it ever (as opposed to "not always") possible to omit braces? > > Oh yes! Not that I recommend it, and I'm not even going to touch on > Perl Golf :) I think you are wrong. Can yo

Re: CodingGuidelines Perl amendment

2013-02-06 Thread demerphq
On 6 February 2013 19:14, Junio C Hamano wrote: > demerphq writes: > >> As you mention below statement modifiers have their place. For instance >> >> next if $whatever; >> >> Is considered preferable to >> >> if ($whatever) { >> next;

Re: CodingGuidelines Perl amendment

2013-02-06 Thread demerphq
On 6 February 2013 17:29, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Ted Zlatanov writes: > >> - As in C (see above), we avoid using braces unnecessarily (but Perl >>forces braces around if/unless/else/foreach blocks, so this is not >>always possible). > > Is it ever (as opposed to "not always") possible t

Re: push race

2012-10-15 Thread demerphq
On 15 October 2012 16:09, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: > On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 11:14 AM, Angelo Borsotti > wrote: >> Hello, > > FWIW we have a lot of lemmings pushing to the same ref all the time at > $work, and while I've seen cases where: > > 1. Two clients try to push > 2. They both get

Re: Ignore on commit

2012-10-04 Thread demerphq
On 5 October 2012 03:00, Andrew Ardill wrote: > On 5 October 2012 07:20, Marco Craveiro wrote: >> ... >> Similar but not quite; the idea is that you know that there is some >> code (I'm just talking about files here, so lets ignore hunks for the >> moment) which is normally checked in but for a p

Re: Should GIT_AUTHOR_{NAME,EMAIL} set the tagger name/email?

2012-09-11 Thread demerphq
On 11 September 2012 18:53, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason writes: > >> On Sat, Sep 1, 2012 at 6:12 PM, Andreas Schwab wrote: >>> Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason writes: >>> I don't get what you mean, what committer info? >>> >>> GIT_COMMITTER_{NAME,EMAIL}. A tagger isn't really

Re: Sync production with Git

2012-08-08 Thread demerphq
On 9 August 2012 06:21, demerphq wrote: > On 8 August 2012 15:11, kiranpyati wrote: >> I am new to github, >> >> Earlier we used to manually upload files on the production through FTP >> although git was present on the production. Due to this now git status shows &

Re: Sync production with Git

2012-08-08 Thread demerphq
On 8 August 2012 15:11, kiranpyati wrote: > I am new to github, > > Earlier we used to manually upload files on the production through FTP > although git was present on the production. Due to this now git status shows > many modified and untrack files. > > To sync that with git we have downloaded