From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Johannes Sixt Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] builtin-status: submodule summary support Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 08:33:39 +0100 Message-ID: <47D78753.2040902@viscovery.net> References: <1205288512-20435-1-git-send-email-pkufranky@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, gitster@pobox.com To: Ping Yin X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Mar 12 08:34:40 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1JZLTr-00029v-BT for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Wed, 12 Mar 2008 08:34:31 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751346AbYCLHdo (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Mar 2008 03:33:44 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751282AbYCLHdo (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Mar 2008 03:33:44 -0400 Received: from lilzmailso02.liwest.at ([212.33.55.13]:21010 "EHLO lilzmailso02.liwest.at" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751086AbYCLHdo (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Mar 2008 03:33:44 -0400 Received: from cm56-163-160.liwest.at ([86.56.163.160] helo=linz.eudaptics.com) by lilzmailso02.liwest.at with esmtpa (Exim 4.66) (envelope-from ) id 1JZLSK-0007Kb-10; Wed, 12 Mar 2008 08:32:56 +0100 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (J6T.linz.viscovery [192.168.1.42]) by linz.eudaptics.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 933E66D9; Wed, 12 Mar 2008 08:33:39 +0100 (CET) User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728) In-Reply-To: <1205288512-20435-1-git-send-email-pkufranky@gmail.com> X-Spam-Score: 1.7 (+) X-Spam-Report: ALL_TRUSTED=-1.8, BAYES_99=3.5 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Ping Yin schrieb: > +static void wt_status_print_submodule_summary(struct wt_status *s) > +{ > + struct child_process sm_summary; > + const char *argv[] = { > + "submodule", > + "summary", > + "--cached", > + "--for-status", > + "--summary-limit", > + summary_limit, Where is summary_limit? Did you split this patch series incorrectly? > + s->amend ? "HEAD^" : "HEAD", Any chance that we avoid "HEAD^" here? Perhaps we have the SHA1 around somewhere? I fear that our MSYS bash mangles it into "HEAD". I shall test it. BTW, you don't mention the prerequisites of this series. I assume it builds on top of your "[PATCH v5 0/5] git-submodule summary" series. > + sm_summary.no_stderr = 1; Why this? If the submodule summary has errors we certainly want to see them. > @@ -321,6 +349,9 @@ void wt_status_print(struct wt_status *s) > } > > wt_status_print_changed(s); > + // must flush s->fp since following call will write to s->fp in a child process > + fflush(s->fp); > + wt_status_print_submodule_summary(s); Hmm. Aren't you unconditionally spawning "git submodule summary" for each git-status/git-commit? -- Hannes