lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [May]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
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    [W:0.054 / U:0.748 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site