Hi Bjoern, On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 10:36:23AM +0200, Bjoern Michaelsen <bjoern.michaelsen@canonical.com> wrote:
Hi, On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 09:34:13AM +0200, Miklos Vajna wrote:My new builds now have a commit message like "2014-10-15: source-hash-defa080e585fb351bc4049b2f280d2e7e5256f6e" in the dbgutil repo, hope that keeps everyone happy. :-)Thats lovely, but still doesnt show up in "git bisect log", doesnt it?
It does, e.g.: $ git bisect log # bad: [29d24957395afa48f63fa078c1a3786cb471232e] 2014-10-16: source-hash-3e2bd1e4022e25b77bcc8eba5e02c1adc57008a1 ... # bad: [671ac8dc45cb809092bcabfe76006eb0948ee081] 2014-10-15: source-hash-defa080e585fb351bc4049b2f280d2e7e5256f6e git bisect bad 671ac8dc45cb809092bcabfe76006eb0948ee081 # first bad commit: [671ac8dc45cb809092bcabfe76006eb0948ee081] 2014-10-15: source-hash-defa080e585fb351bc4049b2f280d2e7e5256f6e
FWIW, tagging existing commits doesnt really touch/change them, so no rebase or other complex tweaking needed. Otherwise we might need some script that extracts that from the repo, so we have useful infomation in the stuff that people paste on bugzilla. OTOG that might be somewhat useful in general, as it might even show the commits in the bibisect range.
Yes, such a script would be useful -- maybe file an EasyHack to create one? Regards, Miklos
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature