Re: Mercurial 0.4b vs git patchbomb benchmark
- From
- Bill Davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>
- Date
- May 2, 2005, 15:49 UTC
- Message-ID
- <42764C0C.8030604@tmr.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <20050430025211.GP17379@opteron.random>
Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
Show 23 quoted lines
> On Fri, Apr 29, 2005 at 01:39:59PM -0700, Matt Mackall wrote: > >>Mercurial is ammenable to rsync provided you devote a read-only >>repository to it on the client side. In other words, you rsync from >>kernel.org/mercurial/linus to local/linus and then you merge from >>local/linus to your own branch. Mercurial's hashing hierarchy is >>similar to git's (and Monotone's), so you can sign a single hash of >>the tree as well. > > > Ok fine. It's also interesting how you already enabled partial transfers > through http. > > Please apply this patch so it doesn't fail on my setup ;) > > --- mercurial-0.4b/hg.~1~ 2005-04-29 02:52:52.000000000 +0200 > +++ mercurial-0.4b/hg 2005-04-30 00:53:02.000000000 +0200 > @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@ > -#!/usr/bin/python > +#!/usr/bin/env python > # > # mercurial - a minimal scalable distributed SCM > # v0.4b "oedipa maas"
Could you explain why this is necessary or desirable? I looked at what env does, and I am missing the point of duplicating bash normal behaviour regarding definition of per-process environment entries.
--
-bill davidsen (davidsen@tmr.com)
"The secret to procrastination is to put things off until the
last possible moment - but no longer" -me