`git log --pretty short` gives the error message "ambiguous argument
'short'". To get the expected result, you need to use `git log
--pretty=short`. However, `git log --since yesterday` and `git log
--since=yesterday` both work as expected.
When is an = needed? What is the reason for these inconsi
On Sun, Dec 2, 2018 at 11:13 AM Robert White wrote:
>
> `git log --pretty short` gives the error message "ambiguous argument
> 'short'". To get the expected result, you need to use `git log
> --pretty=short`. However, `git log --since yesterday` and `git log
> --since=yesterday` both work as expec
Am 13.11.2018 um 11:02 schrieb Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason:
>
> On Mon, Nov 12 2018, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Nov 12 2018, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
>>
>>> I get:
>>>
>>> Test origin/master
>>> peff/jk/loose-cache avar/
as part of an upcoming git class i'm delivering, i thought it would
be amusing to demonstrate the maximum length of colliding SHA-1
prefixes in a repository (in my case, i use the linux kernel git repo
for most of my examples).
is there a way to display the objects in the object database tha
On Sun, Dec 02 2018, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> as part of an upcoming git class i'm delivering, i thought it would
> be amusing to demonstrate the maximum length of colliding SHA-1
> prefixes in a repository (in my case, i use the linux kernel git repo
> for most of my examples).
>
> is ther
On Sat, Dec 01 2018, Cameron Boehmer wrote:
> 1) add a new flag
> -l, --local
> Do not consult git config --global core.excludesFile in
> determining what files git ignores. This is useful in conjunction with
> -x/-X to preserve user files while removing build artifacts.
Or perhaps a genera
On Fri, Feb 09 2018, Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy wrote:
> +static int show_gitcomp(struct parse_opt_ctx_t *ctx,
> + const struct option *opts)
> +{
Says it returns 'static int'...
> [...]
> + exit(0);
Then just exits...
> + /* lone --git-completion-helper is aske
On Sun, 2 Dec 2018, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 02 2018, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
>
> > as part of an upcoming git class i'm delivering, i thought it
> > would be amusing to demonstrate the maximum length of colliding
> > SHA-1 prefixes in a repository (in my case, i use the linu
testing adding by patch for the very first time (i've just never
needed this), and reading the "progit" book and reading the man page,
and the impression i'm getting is that running "git add -p" (going
straight to patch mode) is supposed to be equivalent to running "git
add -i", then typing "p"
On Sun, Dec 02, 2018 at 11:30:19AM -0500, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
>
> testing adding by patch for the very first time (i've just never
> needed this), and reading the "progit" book and reading the man page,
> and the impression i'm getting is that running "git add -p" (going
> straight to patch
On Sun, Dec 02, 2018 at 11:30:19AM -0500, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
>
> testing adding by patch for the very first time (i've just never
> needed this), and reading the "progit" book and reading the man page,
> and the impression i'm getting is that running "git add -p" (going
> straight to patch
On Sun, 2 Dec 2018, Kevin Daudt wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 02, 2018 at 11:30:19AM -0500, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> >
> > testing adding by patch for the very first time (i've just never
> > needed this), and reading the "progit" book and reading the man page,
> > and the impression i'm getting is that
On Sun, 2 Dec 2018, SZEDER Gábor wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 02, 2018 at 11:30:19AM -0500, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> >
> > testing adding by patch for the very first time (i've just never
> > needed this), and reading the "progit" book and reading the man page,
> > and the impression i'm getting is tha
On Sun, 2 Dec 2018, SZEDER Gábor wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 02, 2018 at 11:30:19AM -0500, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> >
> > testing adding by patch for the very first time (i've just never
> > needed this), and reading the "progit" book and reading the man page,
> > and the impression i'm getting is tha
On Sun, Dec 2, 2018 at 6:05 PM Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> > Patch update>> 2
> > staged unstaged path
> > * 1:unchanged+1/-0 README.md
> > * 2:unchanged+1/-0 contrib/README
> > 3:unchanged+1/-0 t/README
> > Patch update>>
> >
> > Here
On Sun, 2 Dec 2018, Duy Nguyen wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 2, 2018 at 6:05 PM Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> > > Patch update>> 2
> > > staged unstaged path
> > > * 1:unchanged+1/-0 README.md
> > > * 2:unchanged+1/-0 contrib/README
> > > 3:unchanged
On December 2, 2018 8:26, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
>
> On Sat, Dec 01 2018, Cameron Boehmer wrote:
>
> > 1) add a new flag
> > -l, --local
> > Do not consult git config --global core.excludesFile in
> > determining what files git ignores. This is useful in conjunction with
> > -x/-X to
--
Hello?
I apologize for invading your privacy, especially by contacting you with
this tool. I have a commercial offer (7,800,000.00 dollar left by my last
client who worked and lived here in my country, I appeal to you because you
share the same last name with the deceased, please reply directl
On 11/30, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
> I am unsure about the wisdom of calling it "--index", though.
>
> The "--index" option is "the command can work only on the index, or
> only on the working tree files, or on both the index and the working
> tree files, and this option tells it to work in the 'b
Hi Junio,
Am 29.11.18 um 03:11 schrieb Junio C Hamano:
[...]
> This was misspoken a bit. Let's revise it to
>
> When producing a colored output (not limited to whitespace
> error coloring of diff output) for contents that are not
> marked as eol=crlf (and other historical means)
"Randall S. Becker" writes:
> Would something like git clean --exclude=file-pattern work as a
> compromise notion? Files matching the pattern would not be cleaned
> regardless of .gitignore or their potential preciousness status
> long-term. Multiple repetitions of the --exclude option might be
We are licensed loan company, rendering our customers with amount they need is
our main priority. We offer all kinds of loans. reply us now for more details.
Jiang Xin writes:
> Git v2.20.0-rc2 has been released, and there are 5 new messages need to
> be translated. So let's start new round of l10n for Git 2.20.0.
A huge thanks, as always, to the translation team. Jiang, sorry to
see that -rc2 slipped just after you sent out the round 2 message
and
Thomas Gummerer writes:
> Agreed, I think --{no-,}overlay is a much better name for the option,
> I'll use that for my patch series (I hope to send that soon after 2.20
> is released).
OK.
> I must admit that I was not aware that the mode is called overlay
> mode, before you explained it to me,
Hi Peff,
On Sat, 1 Dec 2018, Jeff King wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 09:32:48AM +0100, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
>
> > > > Would it not make more sense to add a command-line option (and a config
> > > > setting) to re-schedule failed `exec` commands? Like so:
> > >
> > > Your proposition wo
Greetings
My name is Miss Alizata Aron. It give me a great pleasure to write you, it
attracts me to write to you so that we can be friends if you will have the
desire as me. i will be very happy to be in communication with you so that we
can get to know each other better and see what happen
Am 02.12.18 um 20:31 schrieb Frank Schäfer:
Am 29.11.18 um 03:11 schrieb Junio C Hamano:
[...]
This was misspoken a bit. Let's revise it to
When producing a colored output (not limited to whitespace
error coloring of diff output) for contents that are not
marked as eol=
Jeff King writes:
> Since the test is ultimately checking "can we run should-not-run from
> the current directory", might it be simpler to actually try that as the
> precondition? I.e., something like:
> ...
A nice egg of columbus. It also would save us from mischievous
users who have should-no
"H.Merijn Brand" writes:
> When $PATH contains the current directory as .:PATH, PATH:., PATH:.:PATH,
> or (maybe worse) as :PATH, PATH:, or PATH::PATH - as an empty entry is
> identical to having dot in $PATH - this test used to fail
It is totally unclear what "this test" refers to. Let's retit
Frank Schäfer writes:
> Hi Junio,
>
> Am 29.11.18 um 03:11 schrieb Junio C Hamano:
> [...]
>> This was misspoken a bit. Let's revise it to
>>
>> When producing a colored output (not limited to whitespace
>> error coloring of diff output) for contents that are not
>> marked as eol=
Carlo Marcelo Arenas Belón writes:
> ea2d20d4c2 ("t5004: avoid using tar for checking emptiness of archive",
> 2013-05-09), introduced a fake empty tar archive to allow for portable
> tests of emptiness without having to invoke tar
>
> 4318094047 ("archive: don't add empty directories to archive
Hi,friend,
This is Daniel Murray and i am from Sinara Group Co.Ltd in Russia.
We are glad to know about your company from the web and we are interested in
your products.
Could you kindly send us your Latest catalog and price list for our trial order.
Best Regards,
Daniel Murray
Purchasing Ma
> > Would something like git clean --exclude=file-pattern work as a
> > compromise notion? Files matching the pattern would not be cleaned
> > regardless of .gitignore or their potential preciousness status
> > long-term. Multiple repetitions of the --exclude option might be
> > supportable. I coul
33 matches
Mail list logo
