[lkml]   [2005]   [May]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Mercurial 0.4b vs git patchbomb benchmark
Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 29, 2005 at 01:39:59PM -0700, Matt Mackall wrote:
>>Mercurial is ammenable to rsync provided you devote a read-only
>>repository to it on the client side. In other words, you rsync from
>> to local/linus and then you merge from
>>local/linus to your own branch. Mercurial's hashing hierarchy is
>>similar to git's (and Monotone's), so you can sign a single hash of
>>the tree as well.
> Ok fine. It's also interesting how you already enabled partial transfers
> through http.
> Please apply this patch so it doesn't fail on my setup ;)
> --- mercurial-0.4b/hg.~1~ 2005-04-29 02:52:52.000000000 +0200
> +++ mercurial-0.4b/hg 2005-04-30 00:53:02.000000000 +0200
> @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
> -#!/usr/bin/python
> +#!/usr/bin/env python
> #
> # mercurial - a minimal scalable distributed SCM
> # v0.4b "oedipa maas"

Could you explain why this is necessary or desirable? I looked at what
env does, and I am missing the point of duplicating bash normal
behaviour regarding definition of per-process environment entries.

-bill davidsen (
"The secret to procrastination is to put things off until the
last possible moment - but no longer" -me

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-05-02 18:02    [W:0.116 / U:11.104 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site