From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.5 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E7181F4CF for ; Mon, 21 Nov 2016 23:38:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932185AbcKUXih (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Nov 2016 18:38:37 -0500 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([104.130.231.41]:45765 "EHLO cloud.peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932111AbcKUXig (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Nov 2016 18:38:36 -0500 Received: (qmail 9427 invoked by uid 109); 21 Nov 2016 23:38:31 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.2) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with SMTP; Mon, 21 Nov 2016 23:38:31 +0000 Received: (qmail 22495 invoked by uid 111); 21 Nov 2016 23:39:03 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with SMTP; Mon, 21 Nov 2016 18:39:03 -0500 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Mon, 21 Nov 2016 18:38:29 -0500 Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2016 18:38:29 -0500 From: Jeff King To: Junio C Hamano Cc: Johannes Schindelin , git@vger.kernel.org, Ralf Thielow , =?utf-8?B?Tmd1eeG7hW4gVGjDoWkgTmfhu41j?= Duy , Taufiq Hoven Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] rebase -i: identify problems with core.commentchar Message-ID: <20161121233828.op3skzgujzcwwllg@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <20161121184931.36nuhg2h7u6mjsld@sigill.intra.peff.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 11:12:39AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > Yeah, I noticed that while reading the patch. My b9605bc4f2 did regress > > this case, but called out the fact that "cd subdir && git stripspace" > > would never have worked. So one step back, 2 steps forward, and Dscho's > > patch is the right step forward. > > Yes, absolutely. > > I sent out a set of proposed amends, and the one for this step 1/3 > runs the command inside a subdirectory to force it not to find the > .git/config file relative to its pwd, which can reveal the existing > breakage without help by b9605bc4f2 ;-) hence can be forked for > older maintenance tracks. Makes sense, and your amended patch looks good. -Peff