From: J. Bruce Fields <bfields@fieldses.org>
Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2006 14:34:04 GMT
Subject: Re: Using git-bisect to find more than one breakage
Message-ID: <20061213143404.GA24132@fieldses.org>
In-Reply-To: <6280325c0612112034x373c8022q909ca192a866cfcf@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Dec 12, 2006 at 03:04:29PM +1030, n0dalus wrote:
> This is what I tried to do:
> - Make a branch ("working") at the bad commit
> - Commit a patch to undo the bug-causing change from that commit
> - Make a copy of the master branch
> - git-rebase working
> - (Then if that worked, use git-bisect to find the next breakage)
> 
> I expected git-rebase to just apply all the commits from the master
> onto my working branch, possibly stopping in the case of a conflict to
> the file I patched. Instead, it produces large conflicts with
> unrelated files, on the very first commit it tries to apply. I even
> get the conflicts if the commit I make before using git-rebase changes
> no files at all (just adding an empty file 'test').
> 
> Is there something wrong with my method here? Is there another way to do 
> this?
> 
> I am thinking for now I will just use git-bisect between the bad
> commit and master, and apply my changes to every bisection.

Yes, that's the way to do it.

The git-rebase command is intended for rebasing small pieces of purely
linear history; I don't believe it will work well (at all?) to rebase a
large chunk of kernel history.