* [PATCH] name-rev: use larger timestamp for is_better_name
@ 2017-05-20 20:36 Eric Wong
2017-05-20 21:16 ` Ramsay Jones
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Eric Wong @ 2017-05-20 20:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Junio C Hamano; +Cc: Michael J Gruber, git
This fixes t4202 for me at "44 - log --graph with full output"
on 32-bit x86.
Signed-off-by: Eric Wong <e@80x24.org>
---
This is for pu, I'm still using the machine I used git with in 2005 :)
builtin/name-rev.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/builtin/name-rev.c b/builtin/name-rev.c
index f06498524..35409c03b 100644
--- a/builtin/name-rev.c
+++ b/builtin/name-rev.c
@@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ static const char *prio_names[] = {
static int is_better_name(struct rev_name *name,
const char *tip_name,
- unsigned long taggerdate,
+ timestamp_t taggerdate,
int generation,
int distance,
int from_tag)
--
EW
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] name-rev: use larger timestamp for is_better_name
2017-05-20 20:36 [PATCH] name-rev: use larger timestamp for is_better_name Eric Wong
@ 2017-05-20 21:16 ` Ramsay Jones
2017-05-20 23:21 ` Junio C Hamano
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Ramsay Jones @ 2017-05-20 21:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Eric Wong, Junio C Hamano; +Cc: Michael J Gruber, git
On 20/05/17 21:36, Eric Wong wrote:
> This fixes t4202 for me at "44 - log --graph with full output"
> on 32-bit x86.
>
> Signed-off-by: Eric Wong <e@80x24.org>
> ---
> This is for pu, I'm still using the machine I used git with in 2005 :)
>
> builtin/name-rev.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/builtin/name-rev.c b/builtin/name-rev.c
> index f06498524..35409c03b 100644
> --- a/builtin/name-rev.c
> +++ b/builtin/name-rev.c
> @@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ static const char *prio_names[] = {
>
> static int is_better_name(struct rev_name *name,
> const char *tip_name,
> - unsigned long taggerdate,
> + timestamp_t taggerdate,
> int generation,
> int distance,
> int from_tag)
>
Heh, you seem to be a little ahead of me. :-D
I test on 32-bit Linux from time to time, and tonight's 'pu'
branch fails t4202.44, t6007.2,5-6,12-13,16, t6012.2-11,
t6111.2-65. I bisected the t4202 failure to a merge commit
(99d31e1378, merge branch 'jc/name-rev-lw-tag') and I spotted
the 'unsigned long' taggerdate parameter to the is_better_name()
function.
I was just about to try the patch above and retest, when I saw
your email! (so I can leave that for tonight).
Thanks!
ATB,
Ramsay Jones
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] name-rev: use larger timestamp for is_better_name
2017-05-20 21:16 ` Ramsay Jones
@ 2017-05-20 23:21 ` Junio C Hamano
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Junio C Hamano @ 2017-05-20 23:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ramsay Jones; +Cc: Eric Wong, Michael J Gruber, git
Ramsay Jones <ramsay@ramsayjones.plus.com> writes:
> I test on 32-bit Linux from time to time, and tonight's 'pu'
> branch fails t4202.44, t6007.2,5-6,12-13,16, t6012.2-11,
> t6111.2-65. I bisected the t4202 failure to a merge commit
> (99d31e1378, merge branch 'jc/name-rev-lw-tag') and I spotted
> the 'unsigned long' taggerdate parameter to the is_better_name()
> function.
Thanks. My earlier "oh, cutoff that was long also is a timestamp"
patch was what I did while making this exact "evil merge" change,
and then when I re-integrated everything, I forgot about it.
I'll teach my rerere database about this. Thanks.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2017-05-20 23:21 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2017-05-20 20:36 [PATCH] name-rev: use larger timestamp for is_better_name Eric Wong
2017-05-20 21:16 ` Ramsay Jones
2017-05-20 23:21 ` Junio C Hamano
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://80x24.org/mirrors/git.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).