Re: Bizarre missing changes (git bug?)
- From
Kevin Ballard <kevin@sb.org>
- Date
- Jul 30, 2008, 03:20 UTC
- Message-ID
- <6E45FC6B-B5ED-4A7D-8EBA-66CE0347FFB0@sb.org>
- In-Reply-To
- <Pine.LNX.4.64.0807300430590.6791@localhost.localdomain>
On Jul 29, 2008, at 7:48 PM, Roman Zippel wrote:
Show 15 quoted lines
> For printk.c look for commit > 02630a12c7f72fa294981c8d86e38038781c25b7 and > try to find it in the graphical outputs. > Here is a bit better example than Linus gave: > > [snip] > > Now compare the output of "git-log file1", "git-log --full-history > file1" > and "git-log --full-history --parents file1". You get either both > merge > commits or none, but only one of it is relevant to file1. > > The problem is that in practice "git-log --full-history --parents" > produces way too much information to be useful right away.
Output looks correct to me. And of course --full-history --parents gives lots of output - that's what it's for. You seem to believe that the appropriate output is, what, to display the initial commit, both commits that modified file1, and the first merge, yes? Can you please clarify the logic that states that the first merge commit should be shown but the second should not?
-Kevin Ballard
-- Kevin Ballard http://kevin.sb.org kevin@sb.org http://www.tildesoft.com