On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 4:58 PM, Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
Show 38 quoted lines
> On 06/26/2015 03:15 PM, Christian Couder wrote:
>> On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 3:00 PM, Matthieu Moy
>> <Matthieu.Moy@grenoble-inp.fr> wrote:
>>> Christian Couder <christian.couder@gmail.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> [...]
>>>>
>>>>> +Eventually there will be no more revisions left to bisect, and the
>>>>> +command will print out a description of the first bad commit, and also
>>>>> +create a reference called `refs/bisect/bad` that points at that
>>>>> +commit.
>>>>
>>>> This could be understood as meaning that `refs/bisect/bad` is created
>>>> only at the end of the bisection.
>>>>
>>>>> -Eventually there will be no more revisions left to bisect, and you
>>>>> -will have been left with the first bad kernel revision in "refs/bisect/bad".
>>>>
>>>> The original looks better to me in this regard.
>>>
>>> I'm changing it to:
>>>
>>> Eventually there will be no more revisions left to bisect, and the
>>> command will print out a description of the first bad commit. The
>>> reference `refs/bisect/bad` created by bisect will point at that
>>> commit.
>
> I agree that is better.
>
>> For the last sentence I'd suggest:
>>
>> The reference called `refs/bisect/bad` will point at that commit.
>
> Or maybe
>
> The reference `refs/bisect/bad` will be left pointing at that commit.
Christian Couder <christian.couder@gmail.com>