Re: git-bisect failure

From: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Date: Sep 10, 2005, 21:13 UTC
Message-ID: <20050910141343.578649c7.akpm@osdl.org>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0509101202070.30958@g5.osdl.org>

Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org> wrote:

Show 13 quoted lines

>
> On Sat, 10 Sep 2005, Andrew Morton wrote:
>  >
>  > Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net> wrote:
>  > >
>  > > So it _might_
>  > >  be possible that you said "current LDT" was bad when it was
>  > >  actually good.  That is one possible explanation.
>  > 
>  > I agree.  Mea culpa.  Sorry.
> 
>  Well, this was actually something I hit when testign bisection too: it 
>  _is_ very unforgiving of mistakes.

Yes. That was my third attempt. You basically _have_ to write down the good/bad sequence as you go. One slip and you've blown an hour's work.

>  So the bisection algorithm may have done the right thing from a technical 
>  standpoint, but I suspect it could be made to be a bit more forgiving, or 
>  at least when somebody realizes that bisection didn't work right, we could 
>  have the trail of good/bad markings to try to debug what happened...

Yup.  Simply keeping a little log file would suffice.