Re: Why can't I use git-bisect to find the first *good* commit?
- From
Johannes Sixt <j.sixt@viscovery.net>
- Date
- Mar 28, 2011, 14:40 UTC
- Message-ID
- <4D909DD1.2050904@viscovery.net>
- In-Reply-To
- <AANLkTin1QCda9BV+gND1kcXRTZBF7hj3Chce5OkLX2a9@mail.gmail.com>
Am 3/28/2011 16:29, schrieb Andrew Garber:
Show 28 quoted lines
>> I'd expect this to work: >> >> $ git bisect start >> $ git bisect good >> $ git bisect bad HEAD~100 > > So would I. I think the behavior of git bisect should be changed. > Right now, it's trying to find the first bad commit. Instead, it > should be trying to find the first commit where the code's good/bad > state *changed*. IOW, it should be able to handle both of the > following cases: > > good <--- oldest > good > good > bad <--- the commit we want bisect to find > bad > bad <--- newest > > bad <--- oldest > bad > bad > good <--- the commit we want bisect to find > good > good <--- newest > > It shouldn't matter which end we start on, so long as one end gets > marks good, and the other end gets marked bad.
Define "end" and "other end"! It's not that trivial.
o--o--o--B
/
--o--o--o--o--GWhen I have this history and I mark B as bad and G as good, will I now find the first bad or the first good commit?
-- Hannes