Hey Eric,
On Sat, Jun 11, 2016 at 12:44 AM, Eric Sunshine wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 9:39 AM, Pranit Bauva wrote:
>> On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 3:03 AM, Eric Sunshine
>> wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jun 8, 2016 at 11:24 AM, Pranit Bauva
>>> wrote:
Reimplement `is_expected_rev` shell function i
On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 9:39 AM, Pranit Bauva wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 3:03 AM, Eric Sunshine
> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 8, 2016 at 11:24 AM, Pranit Bauva wrote:
>>> Reimplement `is_expected_rev` shell function in C. This will further be
>>> called from `check_expected_revs` function. This
Hey Eric,
On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 3:03 AM, Eric Sunshine wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 8, 2016 at 11:24 AM, Pranit Bauva wrote:
>> Reimplement `is_expected_rev` shell function in C. This will further be
>> called from `check_expected_revs` function. This is a quite small
>> function thus subcommand facil
On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 5:33 PM, Eric Sunshine wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 8, 2016 at 11:24 AM, Pranit Bauva wrote:
>> + strbuf_trim(&actual_hex);
>> + return !strcmp(actual_hex.buf, expected_hex);
>
> Thus, it only ever gets to this point if the file exists but is empty,
> which is very unli
On Wed, Jun 8, 2016 at 11:24 AM, Pranit Bauva wrote:
> Reimplement `is_expected_rev` shell function in C. This will further be
> called from `check_expected_revs` function. This is a quite small
> function thus subcommand facility is redundant.
This patch should be squashed into patch 2/2, as it
Reimplement `is_expected_rev` shell function in C. This will further be
called from `check_expected_revs` function. This is a quite small
function thus subcommand facility is redundant.
Mentored-by: Lars Schneider
Mentored-by: Christian Couder
Signed-off-by: Pranit Bauva
---
This applies on the
6 matches
Mail list logo