name-rev: use larger timestamp for is_better_name

This fixes t4202 for me at "44 - log --graph with full output"
on 32-bit x86.

Signed-off-by: Eric Wong <redacted>
---
 This is for pu, I'm still using the machine I used git with in 2005 :)

 builtin/name-rev.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/builtin/name-rev.c b/builtin/name-rev.c
index f06498524..35409c03b 100644
--- a/builtin/name-rev.c
+++ b/builtin/name-rev.c

@@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ static const char *prio_names[] = {
 
 static int is_better_name(struct rev_name *name,
 			  const char *tip_name,
-			  unsigned long taggerdate,
+			  timestamp_t taggerdate,
 			  int generation,
 			  int distance,
 			  int from_tag)

-- 
EW

On 20/05/17 21:36, Eric Wong wrote:

Heh, you seem to be a little ahead of me. :-D

I test on 32-bit Linux from time to time, and tonight's 'pu'
branch fails t4202.44, t6007.2,5-6,12-13,16, t6012.2-11,
t6111.2-65. I bisected the t4202 failure to a merge commit
(99d31e1378, merge branch 'jc/name-rev-lw-tag') and I spotted
the 'unsigned long' taggerdate parameter to the is_better_name()
function.

I was just about to try the patch above and retest, when I saw
your email! (so I can leave that for tonight).

Thanks!

ATB,
Ramsay Jones