Re: GIT_TRACE_PERFORMANCE and pager

2016-02-29 Thread Jeff King
On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 02:46:12PM +0100, Christian Couder wrote: > > though I guess I'd question whether trace-performance is interesting at > > all for a paged command, since it is also counting the length of time > > you spend looking at the pager waiting to hit "q". > > In case of "GIT_TRACE_

Re: GIT_TRACE_PERFORMANCE and pager

2016-02-29 Thread Junio C Hamano
On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 3:39 AM, Jeff King wrote: > One workaround is something like: > > GIT_TRACE_PERFORMANCE=3 3>&2 git ... > > though I guess I'd question whether trace-performance is interesting at > all for a paged command, since it is also counting the length of time > you spend looking a

Re: GIT_TRACE_PERFORMANCE and pager

2016-02-29 Thread Christian Couder
On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 12:39 PM, Jeff King wrote: > On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 12:25:49PM +0100, Christian Couder wrote: > >> Setting GIT_TRACE to 1 or 2 seems to work, but maybe it is because it >> outputs stuff at the beginning of the process and not at the end. > > Yeah, I think so. Try this (on

Re: GIT_TRACE_PERFORMANCE and pager

2016-02-29 Thread Jeff King
On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 12:25:49PM +0100, Christian Couder wrote: > Setting GIT_TRACE to 1 or 2 seems to work, but maybe it is because it > outputs stuff at the beginning of the process and not at the end. Yeah, I think so. Try this (on Linux): $ GIT_PAGER='sed s/^/paged:/' \ GIT_TRACE_PER

GIT_TRACE_PERFORMANCE and pager

2016-02-29 Thread Christian Couder
Hi, It looks like setting GIT_TRACE_PERFORMANCE to 1 or 2 (for stdout or stderr) does not always work well with commands that use a pager, for example: - > GIT_TRACE_PERFORMANCE=2 git log -1 commit f02fbc4f9433937ee0463d0342d6d7d97e1f6f1e Author: Junio C Hamano Date: Fri Feb 26 13: