From: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2006 22:41:16 GMT
Subject: Re: bisect help
Message-ID: <7vu0666x2r.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>
In-Reply-To: <20060627220421.GA7234@coredump.intra.peff.net>

Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:

> Since 'test' is a throwaway branch anyway, might it not make sense to
> clone master to test and then rebase satadev onto it? Thus you would end
> up with the linear history:
>   o---o---o---o---o---o---o test (satadev')
>   |           |
> 2.6.17      master
>
> You know that master works and satadev' doesn't, and the bisection is
> simple. After you find that bug, you can throw away the test branch.

I've considered suggesting it before looking at what is in
satadev.  It is merged up in the Linus head right now, so you
are talking about really _huge_ changes that are not yours and
with a lot of merges.

It usually is much easier to rebase your own code than other's.

BTW, I really hate MUA's that does Mail-Followup-To to somebody
else.  This message for example would not help Martin more than
it would help you, but your MUA somehow redirected it to him.