[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <481C266F.9080003@s5r6.in-berlin.de>
Date: Sat, 03 May 2008 10:46:39 +0200
From: Stefan Richter <stefanr@...6.in-berlin.de>
To: Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>
CC: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-next@...r.kernel.org, sfrench@...ibm.com,
swhiteho@...hat.com, ralf@...ux-mips.org, drzeus-list@...eus.cx,
jack@....cz, cbou@...l.ru, jens.axboe@...cle.com, ericvh@...il.com,
wim@...ana.be, chris@...kel.net, nico@....org,
penberg@...helsinki.fi, clameter@....com, ezk@...sunysb.edu,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: git trees which are not yet in linux-next
Jeff Garzik wrote:
>>> Andrew Morton wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 2 May 2008 15:12:06 -0700
>>>> Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> The first
>>>>> problem is working out "how the heck did that patch get into
>>>>> linux-next"? That would be much easier if the signoff trail was
>>>>> complete for git-based
>>>>> patches, but it often is not.
>>>> doh. I'm pulling linux-next's constituent trees independently, so if I
>>>> spot a turd in linux-next I can just grep the various git trees to
>>>> find out
>>>> where it came from.
...
> Poke through the man pages, particularly git-log, and tell it to spit
> out the committer info, then. It's in there.
>
> For example,
>
> git log --pretty=full
...
Of course some committers have more than one tree in -next. So if
Andrew wants to know the actual tree, the laziest method which I know of is
$ gitk <commit_id>
Among else, gitk shows which branches contain the commit. (How to do
this without X GUI?)
--
Stefan Richter
-=====-==--- -=-= ---==
http://arcgraph.de/sr/
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists