On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 08:15:15AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> With any backend that is non-trivial, it would not be unusual for
> the *tool.cmd to look like:
>
> [mergetool]
> mytool = sh -c '
> ... some massaging to prepare the command line
> ... to ru
John Keeping writes:
> On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 12:56:58PM +0100, Joachim Schmitz wrote:
>> John Keeping wrote:
>> > Currently I'm extracting the command word using:
>> >
>> >cmd=$(eval -- "set -- $(git config mergetool.$tool.cmd); echo
>> > \"$1\"")
>>
>> Shouldnt this work?
>> cmd=$((git co
On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 12:56:58PM +0100, Joachim Schmitz wrote:
> John Keeping wrote:
> > Currently I'm extracting the command word using:
> >
> >cmd=$(eval -- "set -- $(git config mergetool.$tool.cmd); echo
> > \"$1\"")
>
> Shouldnt this work?
> cmd=$((git config "mergetool.$tool.cmd" || git
John Keeping wrote:
On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 01:50:19PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
What are the situations where a valid user-defined tools is
unavailable, by the way?
The same as a built-in tool: the command isn't available.
Currently I'm extracting the command word using:
cmd=$(eval --
On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 01:50:19PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> What are the situations where a valid user-defined tools is
> unavailable, by the way?
The same as a built-in tool: the command isn't available.
Currently I'm extracting the command word using:
cmd=$(eval -- "set -- $(git conf
John Keeping writes:
> I've had a quick look and it's quite straightforward to build on top of
> this to get an output format like this:
>
> 'git mergetool --tool-' may be set to one of the following:
> araxis
>...
> vimdiff2
>
> user-defin
From: "David Aguilar"
Sent: Monday, January 28, 2013 9:16 AM
On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 12:20 AM, Philip Oakley
wrote:
From: "David Aguilar"
Sent: Monday, January 28, 2013 12:52 AM
This is round two of this series.
I think this touched on everything brought up in the code review.
4/4 could use
On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 06:41:04PM -0800, David Aguilar wrote:
> John, I didn't completely address your question about keeping
> the sort and prefix in show_tool_help() but I can stop poking at
> it now in case you want to start looking at what it would take
> to get custom tools listed in the --to
On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 12:20 AM, Philip Oakley wrote:
> From: "David Aguilar"
> Sent: Monday, January 28, 2013 12:52 AM
>
>> This is round two of this series.
>> I think this touched on everything brought up in the code review.
>> 4/4 could use a review as I'm not completely familiar with the
>>
From: "David Aguilar"
Sent: Monday, January 28, 2013 12:52 AM
This is round two of this series.
I think this touched on everything brought up in the code review.
4/4 could use a review as I'm not completely familiar with the
makefile dependencies, though it seems to work correctly.
Does this 4
David Aguilar writes:
> Okay, cool, so no need to reroll, ya?
It was more like "please don't switch to incremental yet"; I tweaked
the mode_ok in your v2 and pushed out the result on 'pu' again.
There may later be comments from others that make us realize some
patches need to be rerolled, but n
On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 6:27 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> David Aguilar writes:
>
>> On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 6:08 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>>> I think our works crossed, while I was tweaking the previous series
>>> to push out as part of 'pu' you were already rerolling. Could you
>>> compare th
David Aguilar writes:
> On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 6:08 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> I think our works crossed, while I was tweaking the previous series
>> to push out as part of 'pu' you were already rerolling. Could you
>> compare this series with what I pushed out and see if anything you
>> mis
On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 6:08 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> I think our works crossed, while I was tweaking the previous series
> to push out as part of 'pu' you were already rerolling. Could you
> compare this series with what I pushed out and see if anything you
> missed? I think I fixed the (a &
I think our works crossed, while I was tweaking the previous series
to push out as part of 'pu' you were already rerolling. Could you
compare this series with what I pushed out and see if anything you
missed? I think I fixed the (a && b || c && d) issue in the version
I pushed out, but it is stil
This is round two of this series.
I think this touched on everything brought up in the code review.
4/4 could use a review as I'm not completely familiar with the
makefile dependencies, though it seems to work correctly.
David Aguilar (4):
mergetool--lib: Simplify command expressions
mergetool
16 matches
Mail list logo
