[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:0.020 / U:42.612 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site