[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1705130930200.2836@nanos>
Date: Sat, 13 May 2017 11:35:26 +0200 (CEST)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
cc: Rob Landley <rob@...dley.net>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Is there an recommended way to refer to bitkeepr commits?
On Fri, 12 May 2017, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Which leaves me perplexed. The hashes from tglx's current tree:
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tglx/history.git
> on kernel.org and the hashes in your full history tree differ.
> Given that they are in theory the same tree this distrubs me.
>
> Case in point in the commit connected to:
> "[PATCH] linux-2.5.66-signal-cleanup.patch"
> in tglx's tree is: da334d91ff7001d234863fc7692de1ff90bed57a
That's the proper sha1 for my tree. I jsut verified it against the original
tree which I still have in my archive.
> *scratches my head*
>
> Something appears to have changed somewhere.
Correct. That full history git rewrote the commits in my bitkeeper import.
history.git:
commit 7a2deb32924142696b8174cdf9b38cd72a11fc96
Author: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...lon.transmeta.com>
Date: Mon Feb 4 17:40:40 2002 -0800
Import changeset
full-history:
commit 26245c315da55330cb25dbfdd80be62db41dedb2
Author: linus1 <torvalds@...lon.transmeta.com>
Date: Thu Jan 4 12:00:00 2001 -0600
Import changeset
and as a consequence all other commits have different shas as well.
Sigh....
Thanks,
tglx
Powered by blists - more mailing lists