{"thread":{"id":"7110","subject":"[PATCH] revision walker --boundary: show boundaries again","startedAt":"2007-03-06T11:54:11Z","lastAt":"2007-03-07T00:00:13Z","messageCount":3,"participants":["Johannes Schindelin","Junio C Hamano"],"isPatch":true,"patchVersion":1,"patchTotal":null},"messages":[{"id":"36459","messageId":"Pine.LNX.4.63.0703061252110.22628@wbgn013.biozentrum.uni-wuerzburg.de","threadId":"7110","inReplyTo":null,"subject":"[PATCH] revision walker --boundary: show boundaries again","fromName":"Johannes Schindelin","fromEmail":"johannes.schindelin@gmx.de","sentAt":"2007-03-06T11:54:11Z","receivedAt":"2007-03-06T11:54:11Z","isPatch":true,"sender":{"key":"johannes.schindelin@gmx.de","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/127790?v=4"},"body":"\nWithout this patch, \"git rev-list --boundary master^..master\" shows\nonly master's object name, and nothing else.\n\nIt is mainly an indentation patch, because it delays exit in \nget_revision() until after revs->boundary was checked.\n\nSigned-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>\n---\n\n\tSorry, I don't have time to write a test case, as I have to run.\n\n revision.c |   46 +++++++++++++++++++++++-----------------------\n 1 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)\n\ndiff --git a/revision.c b/revision.c\nindex 35a1711..b6b9fc0 100644\n--- a/revision.c\n+++ b/revision.c\n@@ -1301,31 +1301,31 @@ struct commit *get_revision(struct rev_info *revs)\n \t/*\n \t * Now pick up what they want to give us\n \t */\n-\tif (!(c = get_revision_1(revs)))\n-\t\treturn NULL;\n-\twhile (0 < revs->skip_count) {\n-\t\trevs->skip_count--;\n-\t\tc = get_revision_1(revs);\n-\t\tif (!c)\n-\t\t\tbreak;\n-\t}\n+\tif ((c = get_revision_1(revs))) {\n+\t\twhile (0 < revs->skip_count) {\n+\t\t\trevs->skip_count--;\n+\t\t\tc = get_revision_1(revs);\n+\t\t\tif (!c)\n+\t\t\t\tbreak;\n+\t\t}\n \n-\t/*\n-\t * Check the max_count.\n-\t */\n-\tswitch (revs->max_count) {\n-\tcase -1:\n-\t\tbreak;\n-\tcase 0:\n-\t\t/* Although we grabbed it, it is not shown. */\n-\t\tc = NULL;\n-\t\tbreak;\n-\tdefault:\n-\t\trevs->max_count--;\n-\t}\n+\t\t/*\n+\t\t * Check the max_count.\n+\t\t */\n+\t\tswitch (revs->max_count) {\n+\t\t\tcase -1:\n+\t\t\t\tbreak;\n+\t\t\tcase 0:\n+\t\t\t\t/* Although we grabbed it, it is not shown. */\n+\t\t\t\tc = NULL;\n+\t\t\t\tbreak;\n+\t\t\tdefault:\n+\t\t\t\trevs->max_count--;\n+\t\t}\n \n-\tif (c)\n-\t\tc->object.flags |= SHOWN;\n+\t\tif (c)\n+\t\t\tc->object.flags |= SHOWN;\n+\t}\n \n \tif (!revs->boundary) {\n \t\treturn c;\n-- \n1.5.0.3.2551.gf95a-dirty\n"},{"id":"36488","messageId":"7v8xeanffi.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net","threadId":"7110","inReplyTo":"Pine.LNX.4.63.0703061252110.22628@wbgn013.biozentrum.uni-wuerzburg.de","subject":"Re: [PATCH] revision walker --boundary: show boundaries again","fromName":"Junio C Hamano","fromEmail":"junkio@cox.net","sentAt":"2007-03-06T23:02:57Z","receivedAt":"2007-03-06T23:02:57Z","isPatch":true,"sender":{"key":"gitster@pobox.com","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/54884?v=4"},"body":"Thanks.\n\nI noticed the breakage after those 4 series and have two fixups\nnear the tip of 'next', namely 8839ac94.  Does it not work for\nyou?\n\nBtw, the version of gitweb running on git.kernel.org seems to be\nbroken. Clicking on 'next' label itself or 'shortlog' link next\nto it would not show what's requested for 'next', but 'log' link\nseems to work.\n"},{"id":"36503","messageId":"Pine.LNX.4.63.0703070058240.22628@wbgn013.biozentrum.uni-wuerzburg.de","threadId":"7110","inReplyTo":"7v8xeanffi.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net","subject":"Re: [PATCH] revision walker --boundary: show boundaries again","fromName":"Johannes Schindelin","fromEmail":"johannes.schindelin@gmx.de","sentAt":"2007-03-07T00:00:13Z","receivedAt":"2007-03-07T00:00:13Z","isPatch":true,"sender":{"key":"johannes.schindelin@gmx.de","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/127790?v=4"},"body":"Hi,\n\nOn Tue, 6 Mar 2007, Junio C Hamano wrote:\n\n> Thanks.\n> \n> I noticed the breakage after those 4 series and have two fixups\n> near the tip of 'next', namely 8839ac94.  Does it not work for\n> you?\n\nYes, but I got those commits only _after_ I sent the patch.\n\nAnyway, I saw that it broke when I was trying to make really, really sure \nthat bundles worked as expected, by writing a strict test case.\n\nCiao,\nDscho\n"}]}