Re: [PATCH 11/10] allow forcing index v2 and 64-bit offset treshold

From: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Date: Apr 10, 2007, 00:23 UTC
Message-ID: <7vejmtxekj.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.0.98.0704091901290.28181@xanadu.home>

Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org> writes:

Show 18 quoted lines

> On Mon, 9 Apr 2007, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
>> Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org> writes:
>> 
>> > This is necessary for testing the new capabilities in some automated 
>> > way without having an actual 4GB+ pack.
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org>
>> > ---
>> >
>> > I should write some tests... when I have more time.
>> 
>> It appears everybody is short of time.  I am having two
>> troubles.  Nobody seems to have positive nor negative reports or
>> comments on what are cooking in 'next' so nothing can graduate,
>> and I am behind list discussions on certain areas myself.
>
> At least my latest patch series received two positive reviews.  ;-)

They are _not_ even in 'pu'. I am talking about things that have been cooking.

Show 6 quoted lines

>> > ddiff --git a/t/Makefile b/t/Makefile
>> 
>> ???
>
> Remnant of a change to that file which was later reverted but mtime 
> doesn't match the index.

Double 'd'?