Re: bug in name-rev on linux-2.6 repo?
From: Jeff King <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 22:48:41
Subsystem:
the rest · Maintainer:
Linus Torvalds
Possibly related (same subject, not in this thread)
- 2016-06-15 · bug in name-rev on linux-2.6 repo? · maximilian attems <hidden>
- 2016-06-15 · Re: bug in name-rev on linux-2.6 repo? · Tay Ray Chuan <hidden>
- 2016-06-15 · Re: bug in name-rev on linux-2.6 repo? · maximilian attems <hidden>
- 2016-06-15 · Re: bug in name-rev on linux-2.6 repo? · Jonathan Nieder <hidden>
On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 10:44:33AM -0400, Jeff King wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
Hmm. Maybe clock skew in the commit timestamps is at fault? With this patch to git:diff --git a/builtin/name-rev.c b/builtin/name-rev.c index 06a38ac..7a024ab 100644 --- a/builtin/name-rev.c +++ b/builtin/name-rev.c@@ -29,9 +29,6 @@ static void name_rev(struct commit *commit, if (!commit->object.parsed) parse_commit(commit); - if (commit->date < cutoff) - return; - if (deref) { char *new_name = xmalloc(strlen(tip_name)+3); strcpy(new_name, tip_name);I get: $ $ git name-rev a1de02dccf906faba2ee2d99cac56799bda3b96a a1de02dccf906faba2ee2d99cac56799bda3b96a tags/v2.6.34-rc1~199^2~35 but I haven't tracked down the problematic commit and timestamp yet.
Still looking, but definitely some kind of skew problem. Reverting the patch above and doing this also works:
diff --git a/builtin/name-rev.c b/builtin/name-rev.c
index 06a38ac..198e04d 100644
--- a/builtin/name-rev.c
+++ b/builtin/name-rev.c@@ -5,7 +5,7 @@ #include "refs.h" #include "parse-options.h" -#define CUTOFF_DATE_SLOP 86400 /* one day */ +#define CUTOFF_DATE_SLOP (60*86400) typedef struct rev_name { const char *tip_name;
but a 59-day slop does not. -Peff