GNU bug report logs - #13524
Improving user experience for non-recursive builds

Previous Next

Package: automake;

Reported by: Miles Bader <miles <at> gnu.org>

Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 09:20:02 UTC

Severity: wishlist

Tags: patch

Done: Stefano Lattarini <stefano.lattarini <at> gmail.com>

Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.

Full log


View this message in rfc822 format

From: Stefano Lattarini <stefano.lattarini <at> gmail.com>
To: Peter Rosin <peda <at> lysator.liu.se>
Cc: 13524 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Karl Berry <karl <at> freefriends.org>, Eric Blake <eblake <at> redhat.com>, automake-patches <at> gnu.org, Miles Bader <miles <at> gnu.org>
Subject: bug#13524: Improving user experience for non-recursive builds
Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2013 13:31:04 +0100
On 02/08/2013 10:11 AM, Peter Rosin wrote:
> On 2013-02-08 09:45, Peter Rosin wrote:
>> Stefano Lattarini wrote:
>>> Fine as well.  And of curse, if you want to speed thing up and have more
>>> control on the final result, feel free to shepherd the pending patches to
>>> the agreed form ;-) -- which if I'm not mistaken is:
>>>
>>>   - make the series consist of only two patches, one introducing the
>>>     feature (complete with documentation and NEWS additions, plus your
>>>     original test case), and one follow-up patch implementing my
>>>     testsuite enhancement;
>>>
>>>   - use the '%...%' form, and prefer lower-case for long names (so,
>>>     '%reldir%' a.k.a. '%D%' and '%canon-reldir%' a.k.a. '%C%').
>>
>> Done. I didn't address the canonicalization concern raised by Miles. That
>> seems like a bigger issue than this patch series. However, If that naming
>> is changing, it must be done before this series lands in a released
>> version, or we'll end up with bad comptibility hacks...
> 
> Errm, compatibility...
> 
> Forgot to ask, but should I push out this non-fast-forward to the
> experimental/preproc branch?
>
Yes please.  I will rewind it again once I have, as you suggest, fixed
my "demo test" not to needlessly fiddle with '/dev/full'.

> That would be 'git checkout experimental/preproc' followed by
> 'git push -f origin', right? I did rewrite that branch locally
> assuming the old branch was destined for the bin, but I have
> never actually done such a rewind of upstream before...
>
I fear that Savannah forbid such simple for of non-fast-forward pushes.
Here is what you can do to still force the rewind:

  $ git branch -m experimental/preproc x
  $ git push origin :experimental/preproc
  $ git branch -m x experimental/preproc
  $ git push origin experimental/preproc

Thanks,
  Stefano




This bug report was last modified 12 years and 131 days ago.

Previous Next


GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.