lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [May]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [more markup]  [less markup]  [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
DateSat, 03 May 2008 10:46:39 +0200
FromStefan Richter <>
SubjectRe: git trees which are not yet in linux-next
Jeff Garzik wrote:
>>> Andrew Morton wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 2 May 2008 15:12:06 -0700
>>>> Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> The first
>>>>> problem is working out "how the heck did that patch get into 
>>>>> linux-next"? That would be much easier if the signoff trail was 
>>>>> complete for git-based
>>>>> patches, but it often is not.
>>>> doh.  I'm pulling linux-next's constituent trees independently, so if I
>>>> spot a turd in linux-next I can just grep the various git trees to 
>>>> find out
>>>> where it came from.
...
> Poke through the man pages, particularly git-log, and tell it to spit 
> out the committer info, then.  It's in there.
> 
> For example,
> 
>     git log --pretty=full
...

Of course some committers have more than one tree in -next.  So if 
Andrew wants to know the actual tree, the laziest method which I know of is
$ gitk <commit_id>

Among else, gitk shows which branches contain the commit.  (How to do 
this without X GUI?)
-- 
Stefan Richter
-=====-==--- -=-= ---==
http://arcgraph.de/sr/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-05-03 10:51    [from the cache]
©2003-2008