IRCloggy #git 2017-02-23

Provider of IRC logs since 2005.

WARNING: As Freenode became unjoinable and lost all warnings in topics, we cannot log channels on Freenode anymore.

	2017-02-23
	← gigq left	00:00
	→ cqi joined	00:00
	← jagob left	00:01
	← cqi left	00:01
	← Neobenedict left	00:01
	→ cqi joined	00:02
	← thebope left	00:02
	→ humboldt joined	00:03
	→ peacememories joined	00:03
	→ gugah joined	00:04
	→ ash_workz joined	00:04
	← matoro left	00:06
	← humboldt left	00:06
	→ humboldt joined	00:07
elsevero	is there a solution for this: https://gist.github.com/alexszilagyi/9362ab6bcc54d536ec8afcd823353848 ?	00:07
	→ whaley joined	00:07
	→ gigq joined	00:08
	← zartu left	00:08
	← davidfetter_ge left	00:09
elsevero	StrongBit: you connect it via its IP (if its local) or hostname which you’ve choosed when you have installed it	00:09
	StrongBit: on what Operating System have you’ve installed it ?	00:10
	← ESphynx left	00:10
	← Cthalupa left	00:11
	→ GT4066 joined	00:11
	← m0viefreak left	00:11
	→ m0viefreak joined	00:11
	← intellix left	00:12
	← ShapeShifter499 left	00:12
	← humboldt left	00:13
	→ ShapeShifter499 joined	00:13
	→ isbotnetcool joined	00:13
	← NwS left	00:15
	← Rodya_ left	00:15
	→ NwS joined	00:16
	→ tang^_ joined	00:17
	→ humboldt joined	00:18
	→ Gsham joined	00:18
	→ suy joined	00:18
	← KnightsOfNi left	00:19
	← tang^ left	00:19
	← cjbrambo left	00:19
	→ KnightsOfNi joined	00:19
	← gopar left	00:20
	→ bvcosta joined	00:20
	→ cjbrambo joined	00:20
	← tang^_ left	00:20
	→ Rodya_ joined	00:21
	← humboldt left	00:22
	→ pur3eval joined	00:22
	← LiENUS left	00:23
	← Rodya_ left	00:24
	→ matoro joined	00:24
	← m0viefreak left	00:26
	→ shinnya joined	00:26
	← pur3eval left	00:26
	→ ResidentBiscuit joined	00:29
	← safe left	00:29
	→ oaao joined	00:30
	← svara1 left	00:30
	→ retroj joined	00:30
	→ humboldt joined	00:31
	→ lurkashf1ake joined	00:32
lurkashf1ake	does having a git make sens for two person configuring and installing package in a server	00:33
	← ResidentBiscuit left	00:33
rudi_s	lurkashf1ake: I use git for /etc on my servers with etckeeper. Should work for two persons too ;-)	00:34
lurkashf1ake	I am noob to git and realy want to start having different version and getting stuff portable and well commented between user in a readable workflow	00:35
rudi_s	And a few other repos to document stuff when there are multiple admins so everybody knows how it works.	00:35
lurkashf1ake	different version of files we edit	00:35
	oh	00:36
	← hahuang61 left	00:36
	← LosPup left	00:36
rudi_s	lurkashf1ake: The git used with etckeeper is only stored on a single host and normally not shared between multiple hosts.	00:36
lurkashf1ake	so if I make a git of /etc/httpd, where will it save the other files. Do I choose?	00:37
	← GT4066 left	00:37
	← xissburg left	00:37
rudi_s	If you want to do that, I'd recommend using a configuration managment software like ansible, salt, etc. to track the config of the servers and deploy it. YOu can then store the config in git.	00:37
	lurkashf1ake: Git stores its data in .git in the root of the repository. You can synchronize that over multiple hosts by using remotes.	00:38
	!progit	00:38
gitinfo	[!book] There are several good books available about git; 'Pro Git' is probably the best: http://git-scm.com/book but also look at !bottomup !cs !gcs !designers !gitt !vcbe and !parable	00:38
	→ diego1 joined	00:38
	→ ResidentBiscuit joined	00:39
	diego1 → dviola_	00:39
	← humboldt left	00:39
	→ xissburg joined	00:39
	← ResidentBiscuit left	00:41
	→ joeco joined	00:42
	← isbotnetcool left	00:42
	← howdoi left	00:43
	← hahuang65 left	00:44
	→ marenz joined	00:44
	← matoro left	00:45
	→ Levex joined	00:45
	← peacememories left	00:46
	→ MattMaker joined	00:47
	→ pks joined	00:47
	→ Rodya_ joined	00:47
	← StrongBit left	00:48
	→ venmx joined	00:49
	→ thebope joined	00:51
	← rebrec left	00:51
	← MattMaker left	00:52
	← Atm0spher1c left	00:52
	← svm_invictvs left	00:52
	→ mischat joined	00:53
	→ humboldt joined	00:55
	← thebope left	00:55
	← rivarun left	00:57
	→ nickabbey joined	00:57
	← nickabbey left	00:57
	← humboldt left	00:57
	→ rivarun joined	00:58
	← Levex left	00:58
	→ chipotle joined	00:59
	← mischat left	00:59
	→ rebrec joined	01:01
	← Tobbi left	01:02
	← cdg left	01:03
	→ Levex joined	01:03
	← LeBlaaanc left	01:04
	→ pur3eval joined	01:05
	→ t-mart_ joined	01:06
	→ nowhereman joined	01:06
	← vishal left	01:06
	← xaviergmail_ left	01:07
	← clemf left	01:08
	→ xaviergmail_ joined	01:08
	← t-mart left	01:09
	← t-mart_ left	01:11
	← dreiss left	01:12
	→ thebope joined	01:13
	← oskarkv left	01:13
	→ jon-mac joined	01:13
	← cjbrambo left	01:13
	→ cjbrambo joined	01:15
	← shinnya left	01:15
	← joshszep left	01:16
	← tvw left	01:16
	← acidjnk left	01:21
	← kasual left	01:24
	← venmx left	01:24
	← whaley left	01:26
	→ Derperperd joined	01:27
	← SwiftMatt left	01:27
	← kfoonamalik left	01:30
	→ Cthalupa joined	01:30
	← ToBeCloud left	01:31
	← Gsham left	01:32
	→ matoro joined	01:32
	→ SwiftMatt joined	01:32
	← SwiftMatt left	01:35
	→ chardan joined	01:38
	← crayon left	01:41
	← chardan left	01:42
	→ chardan joined	01:44
	← Raed left	01:47
	→ MattMaker joined	01:48
	← brent__ left	01:48
	← tjbp left	01:48
	→ tjbp joined	01:49
	← publio left	01:49
	← MattMaker left	01:52
	← moei left	01:52
	→ moei joined	01:53
	← chachasmooth left	01:55
	→ DARSCODE joined	01:55
	← Sasazuka left	01:55
	← DARSCODE left	01:55
	→ chachasmooth joined	01:56
	→ a_thakur joined	01:57
	← bvcosta left	01:58
	← elsevero left	01:59
	← lurkashf1ake left	01:59
	← cqi left	01:59
	← prsn left	01:59
	→ _UniFreak joined	01:59
	→ svm_invictvs joined	01:59
	← pur3eval left	02:01
	← a_thakur left	02:03
	→ Sasazuka joined	02:04
	→ zzz joined	02:04
	→ raijin joined	02:04
	← Cthalupa left	02:06
	→ a_thakur joined	02:06
	← Derperperd left	02:07
	← matoro left	02:08
	→ Cthalupa joined	02:09
	→ SwiftMatt joined	02:09
	→ peacememories joined	02:09
	← MarioBranco left	02:10
	← a_thakur left	02:11
	← peacememories left	02:13
	← madewokherd left	02:13
	← johnny56_ left	02:13
	← zzz left	02:13
	→ MarioBranco joined	02:14
	→ dreiss joined	02:14
	→ Raed joined	02:15
SheldonCooper	ok, I have a problem	02:15
	→ glspi joined	02:16
SheldonCooper	I have a small git submodule specifically for some test data used in unit testing	02:16
	running locally is not a problem	02:16
	but some custom install/check system we use copies everything to a /tmp directory	02:17
	→ johnny56_ joined	02:17
SheldonCooper	there, there is no git config --global user.name user.email	02:17
	is there a way to tell it to use a local git config in the submodule?	02:18
	which is only used for the test suite	02:18
	so that it doesn't matter if I run them from my development checkout or they are run from some other system/installer	02:19
	→ Vampire0_ joined	02:20
	← d0nn1e left	02:21
	→ d0nn1e joined	02:23
	→ cdg joined	02:23
	← CheckDavid left	02:24
	→ rrios joined	02:24
	← rrios left	02:24
	→ rrios joined	02:24
	← Vampire0 left	02:24
	← svm_invictvs left	02:24
	← r_rios left	02:25
	← dviola left	02:28
	→ cagedwisdom joined	02:29
	→ dviola joined	02:29
	← Anja left	02:30
SheldonCooper	hmm GIT_CONFIG environment variable may be a viable option	02:31
	← Sasazuka left	02:32
	→ Anja joined	02:33
	→ jstimm joined	02:33
	→ a_thakur joined	02:33
	← LiftLeft left	02:34
	→ gelei007 joined	02:34
	→ madewokherd joined	02:35
	← blackwind_123 left	02:36
	← duderonomy left	02:37
	← pbrewczynski left	02:37
	← marenz left	02:37
	← jstimm left	02:37
	→ matoro joined	02:38
	← Anja left	02:38
	← gelei007 left	02:39
	→ gelei007 joined	02:39
	→ Sasazuka joined	02:40
	→ ResidentBiscuit joined	02:41
	← a_thakur left	02:41
	← xissburg left	02:42
	← cdg left	02:43
	← wcpan left	02:43
	← d^sh left	02:43
	→ Wulf4 joined	02:45
	→ d^sh joined	02:45
	← ResidentBiscuit left	02:46
	→ amdi_ joined	02:46
	→ LiftLeft joined	02:46
	← Ntemis left	02:47
	← Wulf left	02:48
	Wulf4 → Wulf	02:48
	→ MattMaker joined	02:48
	← Sasazuka left	02:49
	→ xissburg joined	02:49
	→ DarkPsydeLord joined	02:49
	→ wcpan joined	02:49
	← matoro left	02:50
	→ clemf joined	02:52
	← Rodya_ left	02:52
	← ojdo left	02:52
	← MattMaker left	02:53
	← hasc left	02:53
	→ Rodya_ joined	02:54
	← chardan left	02:55
	← raijin left	02:55
	← pks left	02:56
	→ mischat joined	02:56
	→ JanC_ joined	02:56
	→ humboldt joined	02:57
	JanC → Guest31516	02:57
	← Guest31516 left	02:57
	JanC_ → JanC	02:57
	→ mehola joined	02:58
	→ raijin joined	02:58
	→ pks joined	02:58
	← SwiftMatt left	02:59
	← humboldt left	03:01
	← mischat left	03:01
	→ lanking joined	03:02
	→ pur3eval joined	03:02
	← rkazak left	03:02
	← mehola left	03:02
	→ humboldt joined	03:02
	→ jameser joined	03:03
	→ ojdo joined	03:03
	← Vortex34 left	03:04
	← Rodya_ left	03:04
	← mikecmpbll left	03:05
	← humboldt left	03:06
	← pur3eval left	03:06
	→ justan0theruser joined	03:07
	← shgysk8zer0_ left	03:08
	→ humboldt joined	03:08
	→ fstd_ joined	03:08
	← fstd left	03:08
	← dviola_ left	03:08
	fstd_ → fstd	03:08
	→ ffilozov joined	03:08
	← justanotheruser left	03:09
	→ Rodya_ joined	03:09
	← rivarun left	03:10
	→ rivarun joined	03:10
	← humboldt left	03:12
	→ cdg joined	03:12
	→ gopar joined	03:12
	← hexagoxel left	03:13
	← gopar left	03:14
	← Levex left	03:14
	→ hexagoxel joined	03:14
	→ t-mart joined	03:16
	→ aavrug joined	03:17
	→ Vortex34 joined	03:17
	← aavrug left	03:18
	→ aavrug joined	03:18
	← cdg left	03:18
	→ humboldt joined	03:19
	→ cdg joined	03:19
	← lowercas_ left	03:20
	→ lowercaseman joined	03:20
	← leeN left	03:21
	→ msisay joined	03:24
	← Rodya_ left	03:24
	→ microbuild3 joined	03:24
	← jameser left	03:24
	→ cqi joined	03:24
	→ matoro joined	03:25
	← microbuild3 left	03:25
	← thebope left	03:26
	← exitcode1 left	03:26
	→ xall joined	03:27
	→ duderonomy joined	03:29
	← gelei007 left	03:29
	← cdg left	03:29
	→ jameser joined	03:29
	→ cdg joined	03:30
	← Sample left	03:31
	← humboldt left	03:36
	← MarioBranco left	03:40
	→ MarioBranco joined	03:41
	→ Ryanar joined	03:42
	← chachasmooth left	03:42
	← jimi_ left	03:43
	← lb1c left	03:44
	→ chachasmooth joined	03:44
	→ lb1c joined	03:44
	← Ryanar left	03:45
	McKraken_zzzzz → McKraken	03:46
	→ xall_ joined	03:46
	→ Ryanar joined	03:47
	→ humboldt joined	03:47
	← xall left	03:48
	← govg left	03:49
	→ MattMaker joined	03:49
	← sunri5e left	03:50
	→ brent__ joined	03:51
	→ sunri5e joined	03:51
	→ Rodya_ joined	03:52
	← humboldt left	03:53
	← MattMaker left	03:54
	→ exitcode1 joined	03:54
	← dreiss left	03:56
	← xall_ left	03:57
	→ xall joined	03:57
	→ mischat joined	03:57
	→ mehola joined	03:59
	→ humboldt joined	04:00
	→ SwiftMatt joined	04:00
	← gugah left	04:00
	← mischat left	04:02
	← humboldt left	04:02
	→ pur3eval joined	04:02
	→ roelmonnens joined	04:03
	→ Goplat joined	04:03
	← mehola left	04:04
	→ clemf_ joined	04:04
	← SwiftMatt left	04:04
	McKraken → McKraken_zzzzz	04:06
	→ hahuang65 joined	04:06
	← clemf left	04:07
	← roelmonnens left	04:07
	← pur3eval left	04:07
	→ Anja joined	04:11
	← msisay left	04:11
	← brent__ left	04:12
	→ brent__ joined	04:13
	← brent__ left	04:13
	← Gustavo6046 left	04:14
	← fatalhalt left	04:14
	→ thebope joined	04:15
	→ dreiss joined	04:17
	← DolphinDream left	04:17
	← hexagoxel left	04:20
	← thebope left	04:20
	→ hexagoxel joined	04:21
	→ Atm0spher1c joined	04:21
	← chipotle left	04:22
	→ chipotle joined	04:24
	→ a_thakur joined	04:24
	← exitcode1 left	04:27
	← aidalgol left	04:32
	→ rchavik joined	04:33
	→ SwiftMatt joined	04:38
	→ govg joined	04:41
	→ ThomasTang joined	04:43
	← chipotle left	04:44
	← a_thakur left	04:44
	← glspi left	04:44
	→ rj1 joined	04:45
	→ ResidentBiscuit joined	04:46
	← raijin left	04:46
	→ a_thakur joined	04:46
	→ svm_invictvs joined	04:47
	→ jstimm joined	04:47
	← Ryanar left	04:47
	→ MattMaker joined	04:50
	← ResidentBiscuit left	04:51
	← jstimm left	04:51
	← ahr3n left	04:51
	← acln left	04:55
	→ Cabanoss- joined	04:55
	← MattMaker left	04:55
	→ acln joined	04:55
	← jeffreylevesque left	04:55
	→ jeffreylevesque joined	04:57
	→ ayogi joined	04:58
	→ mischat joined	04:58
	→ ozmage joined	04:58
	← Cabanossi left	04:59
	Cabanoss- → Cabanossi	04:59
	← dermoth left	05:00
	→ menip joined	05:00
	→ dermoth joined	05:00
	← mischat left	05:03
	→ pur3eval joined	05:03
	→ ac joined	05:05
	ac → Guest11757	05:05
	← Guest11757 left	05:06
	← pur3eval left	05:07
	← ozmage left	05:09
	→ chipotle joined	05:10
	→ thebope joined	05:10
	← thebope left	05:14
	→ raijin joined	05:14
	→ ozmage joined	05:15
	→ cdg_ joined	05:16
	← a_thakur left	05:16
	← xall left	05:17
	→ a_thakur joined	05:17
	← chipotle left	05:17
	← cdg left	05:19
	← xissburg left	05:19
	→ xissburg joined	05:20
	← a_thakur left	05:21
	← durham left	05:22
	← ozmage left	05:23
	→ Xenophon1 joined	05:27
	→ durham joined	05:27
	→ jimi_ joined	05:28
	→ ozmage joined	05:28
	← XenophonF left	05:29
	→ safe joined	05:29
	← DarkPsydeLord left	05:30
	← ash_workz left	05:31
	← bill99 left	05:31
	→ ash_workz joined	05:32
	← MarioBranco left	05:33
	→ elementalest joined	05:34
	→ hhee joined	05:35
	← Rodya_ left	05:35
	→ Rodya_ joined	05:36
	← noteness left	05:38
	→ a_thakur joined	05:38
	→ noteness joined	05:39
	← rafalcpp left	05:39
	→ bocaneri joined	05:39
	← xaviergmail_ left	05:39
	→ xaviergmail_ joined	05:40
	→ elsevero joined	05:40
	← irqq left	05:40
	← Rodya_ left	05:40
	→ MarioBranco joined	05:41
	← ShapeShifter499 left	05:45
	← l4v2 left	05:45
	→ ShapeShifter499 joined	05:45
	→ kexmex joined	05:47
	→ quite joined	05:48
	← quite left	05:48
	→ quite joined	05:48
	→ ckruczek joined	05:48
	← ThomasTang left	05:48
	→ Tatou joined	05:48
Tatou	Are there any issues with using the git-svn bridge?	05:49
	gitinfo set mode: +v	05:50
ckruczek	jop, svn	05:50
Tatou	What.	05:50
	→ MattMaker joined	05:51
	→ pur3eval joined	05:53
_ikke_	Tatou: #git != #github	05:53
	Or do you mean just using plain git-svn?	05:53
	→ xall joined	05:54
	← netj left	05:55
	→ netj joined	05:55
	← MattMaker left	05:56
	→ peterbecich joined	05:57
	→ mischat joined	05:59
	← ozmage left	05:59
	→ DaveTaboola joined	06:00
	→ mehola joined	06:00
	← MarioBranco left	06:01
	← ffilozov left	06:02
	→ MarioBranco joined	06:02
	→ gelei007 joined	06:02
	← mischat left	06:03
	→ thebope joined	06:04
	→ navidr joined	06:04
	← mehola left	06:05
	→ sbulage joined	06:05
	← dminuoso left	06:06
	→ dminuoso joined	06:06
	← cyphase left	06:07
	← peterbecich left	06:07
	← thebope left	06:08
	→ peterbecich joined	06:09
	← xissburg left	06:10
	← rj1 left	06:10
	← durham left	06:10
	→ cyphase joined	06:12
	→ rj1 joined	06:13
	→ dec0n joined	06:13
	→ Sample joined	06:14
	→ bill99 joined	06:14
	← MarioBranco left	06:14
	→ overlord_tm joined	06:15
	← xall left	06:16
	→ xissburg joined	06:16
	← bill99 left	06:17
	← MrC left	06:18
	← MasterNayru left	06:18
	← pur3eval left	06:20
	→ murph joined	06:20
	murph → Guest29403	06:20
	→ venmx joined	06:21
	← gelei007 left	06:24
	← venmx left	06:26
	← svm_invictvs left	06:28
	← DaveTaboola left	06:30
	→ xall joined	06:32
	→ qt-x joined	06:32
	← madewokherd left	06:33
	→ MrC joined	06:37
	→ expl015s_ joined	06:37
	← expl015s_ left	06:37
	← a_thakur left	06:41
	→ ahr3n joined	06:41
	← safe left	06:42
	→ zeroed joined	06:43
	→ ResidentBiscuit joined	06:47
	→ circ-user-3LZMN joined	06:48
	← fletom left	06:48
	→ mehola joined	06:48
	→ fletom joined	06:49
	→ Raging_Hog joined	06:50
	← zeroed left	06:51
	← ResidentBiscuit left	06:52
	→ MattMaker joined	06:52
	→ zefferno joined	06:53
	→ a_thakur joined	06:53
	← a_thakur left	06:55
	→ a_thakur joined	06:56
	← MattMaker left	06:56
	→ zeroed joined	06:57
	→ Darren_ joined	06:57
	→ thebope joined	06:58
	← xissburg left	06:59
	← a_thakur left	06:59
	→ mischat joined	06:59
	→ xissburg joined	07:00
	← ahr3n left	07:00
	← pR0Ps left	07:02
	← thebope left	07:02
	← ISmithers left	07:03
	→ Junior joined	07:04
	← sarri left	07:04
	← mischat left	07:04
	→ a_thakur joined	07:07
	→ rlb joined	07:07
	→ pR0Ps joined	07:08
	← circ-user-3LZMN left	07:09
	← peterbecich left	07:10
	← a_thakur left	07:11
rlb	Is there some recommended way to have all of my commit invocations verify "diff --check" by default before comitting (in addition to anything else a given repository might do in its own pre-commit hook)?	07:11
	→ gelei007 joined	07:11
_ikke_	rlb: You'd add that to the pre-commit hook too	07:12
rlb	Thanks, though I don't want to need to modify the pre-commit hook (if any) for every repo I work with.	07:12
	← hhee left	07:13
rlb	Worst case, I can just create my own commit subcommand, but I thought I'd see if there was something preferable.	07:13
	subcommand(wrapper)	07:13
_ikke_	rlb: You can have a pre-commit hook wrapper that calls multiple other checks	07:14
rlb	You mean a "global" one that runs my check and then looks for the per-repo hook (if any) and runs that?	07:14
	I suppose as long as I can find the "current repo"'s hook dir from within my global hook, that might work.	07:15
	← Anja left	07:15
	→ MattMaker joined	07:16
	→ scarabx joined	07:17
	← scarabx left	07:17
rlb	Suppose I'll also have to see if hooksPath is all-or-nothing, or if it shadows. Ideally, I don't want to have to keep a complete set (as the set evolves) of mostly pass-through hooks, just to wrap pre-commit.	07:17
	Hmm, the docs seem to imply all-or-nothing.	07:19
	→ tripton joined	07:20
	Vampire0_ → Vampire0	07:20
	→ roelmonnens joined	07:21
	← MrWoohoo left	07:21
	→ thiago joined	07:21
	← t-mart left	07:23
	→ _UniFreak_ joined	07:24
	→ JeroenT joined	07:24
	← JeroenT left	07:26
	← _UniFreak left	07:26
	→ JeroenT joined	07:26
	→ a_thakur joined	07:27
	→ Anja joined	07:27
	← roelmonnens left	07:27
	→ redhedded1 joined	07:28
	← Anja left	07:28
	→ roelmonnens joined	07:28
	← gelei007 left	07:28
	→ Anja joined	07:28
	← dreiss left	07:29
Vampire0	rlb, you are aware that a repo you clone never had any hooks, until you add them manually, aren't you. hooks are not part of the clone process	07:29
	→ pur3eval joined	07:30
	← nidr0x left	07:31
	← Atm0spher1c left	07:33
	← oaao left	07:34
	← dave0x6d left	07:35
	→ oaao joined	07:35
	← pur3eval left	07:35
	← a_thakur left	07:35
	← menip left	07:38
	→ fewspider joined	07:38
	→ a_thakur joined	07:39
	→ King_Hual joined	07:42
	← ShapeShifter499 left	07:44
	→ jnavila joined	07:45
	→ sarri joined	07:45
	← sarri left	07:45
	→ sarri joined	07:45
	← mrkake left	07:46
	→ Andrew_K joined	07:48
	→ troulouliou_div2 joined	07:48
	← a_thakur left	07:48
	← boombatower left	07:49
	→ a_thakur joined	07:52
	→ thebope joined	07:52
	→ mrkake joined	07:52
	→ bernardio joined	07:52
	← overlord_tm left	07:53
	→ overlord_tm joined	07:54
	→ bill99 joined	07:54
	→ s1scha joined	07:55
	← a_thakur left	07:56
	→ gelei007 joined	07:56
	← MattMaker left	07:56
	→ miczac joined	07:56
	→ ozmage joined	07:56
	← thebope left	07:56
	gitinfo set mode: +v	07:56
	→ jagob joined	07:59
	→ mischat joined	08:00
	← miczac left	08:01
	← elsevero left	08:03
	← tripton left	08:03
	← zeroed left	08:04
	→ zeroed joined	08:04
	← Anja left	08:05
	← kexmex left	08:05
	← mischat left	08:06
	→ nothingnew joined	08:07
	→ peterbecich joined	08:07
	→ roelmonn_ joined	08:08
	← rlb left	08:09
	→ miczac joined	08:09
	gitinfo set mode: +v	08:09
	→ mischat joined	08:10
	← roelmonnens left	08:11
	→ a_thakur joined	08:12
	← mischat left	08:12
	← a_thakur left	08:12
	← nothingnew left	08:13
	→ a_thakur joined	08:13
	→ zulutango joined	08:14
	← ozmage left	08:15
	← tristanp left	08:15
	← eneasvva left	08:16
	→ TomyWork joined	08:16
	→ Tobbi joined	08:16
	→ Alienpruts joined	08:18
	← zeroed left	08:18
	→ Anja joined	08:18
	→ elect joined	08:18
	← xaviergmail_ left	08:19
	→ zeroed joined	08:19
	← zeroed left	08:19
	→ zeroed joined	08:19
	→ User458764 joined	08:20
	→ rlb joined	08:20
	→ xaviergmail_ joined	08:20
	← miczac left	08:20
	→ venmx joined	08:22
	→ miczac joined	08:22
	→ vuoto joined	08:23
	gitinfo set mode: +v	08:23
	→ dedicated_ joined	08:25
	→ theoceaniscool joined	08:26
	← venmx left	08:26
	← dedicated left	08:27
	← orbyt_ left	08:28
	← raijin left	08:29
	→ donnib joined	08:30
	← Tobbi left	08:30
	→ elsevero joined	08:30
donnib	do i understand correct that in a large repository not only will cloning be slow checkout will also since the pack files are large to unpack ?	08:30
	← Anja left	08:31
	← a_thakur left	08:31
	← cqi left	08:33
	→ a_thakur joined	08:34
	← a_thakur left	08:34
dminuoso	donnib: I have not experienced slow checkouts in large repositories before	08:36
	← govg left	08:37
	← chachasmooth left	08:37
	← Darren_ left	08:37
	→ chachasmooth joined	08:38
	→ a_thakur joined	08:39
	→ chachasmooth_ joined	08:39
	← a_thakur left	08:40
	→ a_thakur joined	08:41
	→ dvaske joined	08:41
	→ chachasm- joined	08:42
	→ dvaske_ joined	08:42
	→ Anja joined	08:43
	← chachasmooth left	08:44
	→ sasamil joined	08:44
	← chachasmooth_ left	08:44
	→ Balliad joined	08:45
	→ kexmex joined	08:45
	→ thebope joined	08:46
	← dvaske left	08:46
	→ mikecmpbll joined	08:47
	← chachasm- left	08:47
	→ chachasmooth joined	08:48
donnib	dminuoso: so it's only the Clone who is impacted by big repo ?	08:48
	→ kurkale6ka joined	08:49
_ikke_	checkouts can take a long time too	08:49
	but not necessarily due to the packfile format	08:49
	→ Tobbi joined	08:50
_ikke_	Usually the slowness is in writing the individual files to disk	08:50
	← thebope left	08:50
	← a_thakur left	08:51
	← kexmex left	08:52
	← kyan left	08:52
	← diogenese left	08:53
	← chachasmooth left	08:53
	→ tvw joined	08:54
	→ ozmage joined	08:54
	→ a_thakur joined	08:56
	→ MattMaker joined	08:57
	→ chachasmooth joined	08:57
	→ hhee joined	08:58
	→ p4trix joined	09:01
	← p4trix left	09:01
	← MattMaker left	09:02
	→ bongjovi joined	09:02
	→ dersand joined	09:03
	→ ResidentBiscuit joined	09:04
	→ fortin joined	09:04
	→ govg joined	09:05
	← bernardio left	09:07
fortin	hello folks. I'm trying to compile 2.11.1 statically linked using this parameters: CFLAGS="${CFLAGS} -static-libgcc" NO_OPENSSL=1 NO_CURL=1. Build succeeds but if I inspect the binary with "file" tool it says it's dynamically linked: "dynamically linked (uses shared libs)". Following suggestions from http://stackoverflow.com/questions/11570188/how-to-build-git-with-static-linking	09:07
	← ResidentBiscuit left	09:08
	→ bernardio joined	09:08
	← ckruczek left	09:08
	← clemf_ left	09:10
dminuoso	_ikke_: but usually a checkout would only be slow if there's huge differences right?	09:10
	→ diogenese joined	09:12
	← gelei007 left	09:12
	← miczac left	09:12
	← a_thakur left	09:14
	← zeroed left	09:14
	→ brent__ joined	09:14
	← ozmage left	09:15
	→ kexmex joined	09:17
	→ gtristan joined	09:17
	→ marcogmonteiro joined	09:18
gtristan	How can I get the diff of a specific file between 2 revisions ?	09:18
	git diff sha1...sha2 file.txt	09:18
	seems not to be correct	09:18
	nor is git diff file.txt sha1...sha2	09:18
	← brent__ left	09:19
	→ grayjoc joined	09:19
_ikke_	gtristan: without the dots	09:19
	git diff sha1 sha2 file	09:19
	→ clmsy joined	09:20
	→ afuentes joined	09:20
	→ redeemed joined	09:20
	← Tobbi left	09:20
	→ a_thakur joined	09:21
gtristan	_ikke_, Ah thanks !	09:21
	Oh	09:22
	fatal: ambiguous argument 'file.txt': unknown revision or path not in the working tree.	09:22
	_ikke_, can I do it in a bare repo ?	09:22
	→ MasterNayru joined	09:22
	→ zeroed joined	09:22
_ikke_	should be possible	09:22
	→ miczac joined	09:22
_ikke_	try adding --	09:22
gtristan	ah	09:22
_ikke_	git diff sha1 sha2 -- file	09:22
gtristan	Just did that :)	09:22
	Indeed	09:22
	that worked	09:23
	gitinfo set mode: +v	09:23
_ikke_	alright	09:23
gtristan	thanks again :)	09:23
	← kexmex left	09:24
	→ snoo joined	09:24
	→ Tobbi joined	09:24
snoo	Hi, what is the config which determines that "git checkout foo" will automatically create a local branch "foo" tracking "origin/foo" if it doesn't already exist?	09:24
_ikke_	snoo: not sure if it's a config option	09:24
snoo	Seems my Jenkins server isn't having this behaviour, and not sure how to enable it, since it's default in git on my desktop.	09:24
canton7	snoo, no config: it's a hard-coded bit of behaviour	09:24
_ikke_	snoo: If you have multiple remotes with the same branches, it won't work	09:25
snoo	well on this one machine "git checkout master" gives an error " pathspec 'master' did not match any file(s) known to git." even though remotes/origin/master is fetched	09:25
	ah	09:25
	← a_thakur left	09:25
_ikke_	snoo: i would not rely on this feature anyway in this case	09:25
	snoo: it's better to be explicit	09:26
	→ a_thakur joined	09:26
snoo	I don't think it's my code, it's Jenkins behaviour	09:26
canton7	from the man page, "	09:26
	If <branch> is not found but there does exist a tracking branch in exactly one remote (call it <remote>) with a matching name, treat as equivalent to $ git checkout -b <branch> --track <remote>/<branch>"	09:26
_ikke_	snoo: Did you change the default branch on the remote?	09:26
	snoo: I think jenkins assumes master exists somehow	09:26
canton7	but yeah, the only reason that bit of behaviour exists is to be a bit nicer to new users, I think. 'git checkout -b foo origin/foo' is going to be better	09:26
snoo	no, the issue is that jenkins is fetching multiple remotes which have "master"	09:27
	I will hack it to explicitly check out remote_name/branch_name	09:27
_ikke_	snoo: why doesn't master exist in the first place?	09:27
	→ aard_ joined	09:27
	← a_thakur left	09:27
snoo	not sure. jenkins sets up a repo and then our job adds the remote	09:28
	our job doesn't do git init, so it must be baked into jenkins	09:28
	→ a_thakur joined	09:29
_ikke_	snoo: I would expect jenkins to do a clone	09:32
	which would also create the default branch (which by default is master)	09:32
snoo	I'll look into it, I understand the behaviour now anyway so thanks.	09:32
	← SwiftMatt left	09:33
	→ MrWoohoo joined	09:33
	← Goplat left	09:34
	← Tobbi left	09:34
	→ raijin joined	09:34
	← cdg_ left	09:35
	← pks left	09:35
	← lanking left	09:36
	← xall left	09:36
	→ xall_ joined	09:37
	→ acidjnk22 joined	09:38
	← fortin left	09:39
	→ mischat joined	09:40
	→ thebope joined	09:40
	← jimi_ left	09:42
	→ jimi_ joined	09:43
	→ Tobbi joined	09:44
	← thebope left	09:44
codebam	how can I configure a webhook to auto update my local repo every time my friend pushes by adding a git hook on his repo?	09:47
	→ seni1 joined	09:47
codebam	ie he pushes, sends a put to me, code is updated, server is restarted	09:47
	→ cqi joined	09:48
	← Blkt left	09:48
	→ chll_ joined	09:49
	→ Blkt joined	09:49
	← xall_ left	09:52
	← Tobbi left	09:54
	← nowhereman left	09:55
	→ rafalcpp joined	09:56
	← babilen left	09:57
	→ Levex joined	09:58
	→ MattMaker joined	09:58
	→ irqq joined	10:02
	← khfeng left	10:02
	→ Tobbi joined	10:02
	← MattMaker left	10:02
	→ babilen joined	10:03
	← Levex left	10:05
	→ khfeng joined	10:05
	← cqi left	10:05
	→ Levex joined	10:05
	→ metalraiden34 joined	10:05
	→ Dumblez0r joined	10:06
	← miczac left	10:08
	snoo → rory	10:08
	→ nothingnew joined	10:09
	← Tobbi left	10:11
	← mrkake left	10:11
	← Guest55219 left	10:11
	→ valkyr2e joined	10:11
	→ Tobbi joined	10:12
	→ acetakwas joined	10:13
	→ mrtn joined	10:16
	← mrtn left	10:17
	← LiftLeft left	10:17
	→ ferr1 joined	10:18
	← Levex left	10:18
	→ mrkake joined	10:20
	→ joeco_ joined	10:20
	← User458764 left	10:21
	→ venmx joined	10:22
	← chachasmooth left	10:23
	← joeco left	10:23
	← grayjoc left	10:24
	← Tobbi left	10:24
	← marcogmonteiro left	10:24
	→ grayjoc joined	10:24
	← oaao left	10:25
	→ oaao joined	10:25
	→ chachasmooth joined	10:25
	→ marcogmonteiro joined	10:26
	→ StrongBit joined	10:27
	← a_thakur left	10:27
	← fahadash left	10:27
	← venmx left	10:28
	→ nettoweb joined	10:28
	→ a_thakur joined	10:29
	→ miczac joined	10:30
	gitinfo set mode: +v	10:30
	→ RxMcDonald joined	10:31
	→ intellix joined	10:31
	→ Snugglebash joined	10:31
	← Snugglebash left	10:31
	→ Snugglebash joined	10:32
	← Snugglebash left	10:32
	→ Tobbi joined	10:32
	→ User458764 joined	10:32
	→ nd joined	10:33
	← dsdeiz left	10:33
	→ thebope joined	10:34
	← djb-irc left	10:35
	← fewspider left	10:36
	← nd_ left	10:36
	← mehola left	10:37
	→ pks joined	10:38
	← thebope left	10:38
	← mindfart left	10:41
	→ djb-irc joined	10:42
	← davimore left	10:43
	← metachr0n left	10:44
	← vuoto left	10:44
	← metalraiden34 left	10:44
	→ metachr0n joined	10:45
	→ oskarkv joined	10:46
	← jimi_ left	10:47
	→ bvcosta joined	10:47
	→ nettoweb1 joined	10:48
	← nettoweb left	10:48
	← qt-x left	10:48
	→ ahr3n joined	10:48
	→ rgb-one joined	10:50
rgb-one	Hey	10:50
	← jameser left	10:51
	→ r__rios joined	10:52
	→ qt-x joined	10:52
	← bernardio left	10:53
	→ r_rios joined	10:54
	← r_rios left	10:54
	→ r_rios joined	10:54
	→ davimore joined	10:54
	← rrios left	10:55
	← nothingnew left	10:55
gitinfo	rgb-one: [!welcome] Welcome to #git, a place full of helpful gits. If you have a question, feel free to just go ahead and ask—somebody should answer shortly. For more info on this channel, see http://jk.gs/git/ Take backups (type !backup to learn how) before taking advice.	10:55
rgb-one	Whenever I change a branch one specific file has a CRLF instead of LF and it shows up as modified	10:55
	why is this?	10:55
gtristan	So I have an automated task which will be checking out repos, and one of the steps is to make a diff between two commits for a given file (as I was asking about above)	10:56
	→ bernardio joined	10:56
gtristan	My original thinking, was; I will do nothing if there is no diff output	10:56
	← r__rios left	10:56
	← roelmonn_ left	10:56
gtristan	But, now I want to parse the diff output because, it's going to be common that a one line change occurs which I want to ignore	10:56
	+ Version: abc	10:57
	→ joeco__ joined	10:57
gtristan	- Version: def	10:57
	Like that	10:57
	→ leeN joined	10:57
gtristan	So I can get to parsing, but; is there a way I can tell `git diff` to give me more brief output ?	10:57
	← theoceaniscool left	10:57
gtristan	So that I only have the 2 lines, if possible	10:57
	or at least not the `diff --git bla bla` line and not those ---a/path ---b/path lines	10:58
	What would be the most practical git diff invocation for this ?	10:58
	→ MattMaker joined	10:59
	← miczac left	10:59
	← joeco_ left	11:00
	→ c0c0 joined	11:01
	→ tcorneli joined	11:02
	← MattMaker left	11:03
	→ rnsanchez joined	11:04
	← redhedded1 left	11:05
StrongBit	Hello. I am using GOGs. how can I backup my projects?	11:05
selckin	good old games?	11:05
	→ cdg joined	11:06
	← marcogmonteiro left	11:06
	← Xenophon1 left	11:07
	→ Gustavo6046 joined	11:07
gtristan	fwiw, git diff --unified=0 gets me much closer to something useful :)	11:07
	think that's good enough for me	11:07
	← ahr3n left	11:09
	← cdg left	11:10
	→ theoceaniscool joined	11:10
	→ kimorigadommoy joined	11:11
	← User458764 left	11:13
	← theoceaniscool left	11:13
	→ XenophonF joined	11:13
	→ ThomasLocke joined	11:14
	← bvcosta left	11:16
	← Sample left	11:17
	→ tristanp joined	11:17
	→ marcogmonteiro joined	11:18
	gitinfo set mode: +v	11:19
kimorigadommoy	Hey guys! Me and my colleagues are having an argument about wether ‘cache’ in git is used as ‘cache’ (storing data, for easier access) or not. Can please someone give us a clean answer like: Yes or No! :) Thanks in advance!	11:19
osse	cache? what cache?	11:20
selckin	as in rm --cached ?	11:20
kimorigadommoy	yes	11:20
	→ ResidentBiscuit joined	11:20
osse	the index used to be called the cache	11:20
selckin	so not really a 'cache'	11:21
kimorigadommoy	Thas is "No" right ?	11:21
selckin	yes	11:21
	→ flaviodesousa joined	11:22
	← enckse left	11:22
	← storrgie left	11:22
rudi_s	And now it's called staging area.	11:22
	← tristanp left	11:23
	← acetakwas left	11:23
	→ enckse joined	11:23
	→ storrgie joined	11:25
	← ResidentBiscuit left	11:25
	← a_thakur left	11:26
	→ thebope joined	11:28
	→ marenz joined	11:29
	→ a_thakur joined	11:29
	→ okjdpi joined	11:30
_ikke_	Not really	11:30
	It's still called the index	11:30
kimorigadommoy	why index is used?	11:30
selckin	because it was better then cache	11:30
kimorigadommoy	what is index in this context ?	11:31
selckin	the staging area	11:31
_ikke_	Index of file blobs	11:31
kimorigadommoy	no, why is it used*	11:31
	the question is... for easier access, or just to have an understanding of changes?	11:31
osse	kimorigadommoy: man gitglossary	11:32
gitinfo	kimorigadommoy: the gitglossary manpage is available at http://jk.gs/gitglossary.html	11:32
_ikke_	kimorigadommoy: git ls-files --debug gives you a little bit of insight of what it contains (but it's not complete)\	11:32
selckin	you stage the changes you want to commit (which files, or which hunks from files), then you can review then and commit	11:32
	← thebope left	11:32
_ikke_	But the index contains a complete snapshot	11:32
	"A collection of files with stat information, whose contents are stored as objects. The index is a stored version of your working tree."	11:33
	← Anja left	11:33
_ikke_	Note that .git/index does not contain the contents itself, just a reference to the blobs	11:33
	← sunri5e left	11:33
	→ acetakwas joined	11:34
	→ User458764 joined	11:34
	→ sunri5e joined	11:34
	← Tobbi left	11:35
kimorigadommoy	if git was a daemon :D it would save those reference in memory? :D	11:35
	→ dcpc007 joined	11:35
_ikke_	kimorigadommoy: Some things, but it would still need to store things on disk	11:36
	You don't want your staged changes to be gone when you restart the daemon	11:36
	→ DBag joined	11:36
	← cagedwisdom left	11:36
	← DBag left	11:37
kimorigadommoy	makes sense, but the main question still exists, is it for speed purposes, or it is a logic thing	11:37
_ikke_	combination	11:37
	the stat info is for speed	11:37
	← askb left	11:38
_ikke_	The reference snapshot of the working tree is for logical reasons (though, it's also optimized to easily create tree objects from it)	11:38
	→ dgonzo joined	11:38
	← tcorneli left	11:39
_ikke_	If you delete the index, you lose state (the staged changes)	11:40
	without the index, certain operations would take much longer (git status for example)	11:40
	→ Torrone joined	11:41
	→ bvcosta joined	11:41
	→ thadtheman joined	11:43
kimorigadommoy	_ikke_ thank you for your response!	11:43
	it was what needed	11:43
	← kimorigadommoy left	11:43
thadtheman	Can you clone multiple repos in one command? git clone repo1 repo2 repo3 ?	11:43
_ikke_	no	11:44
	→ whaley joined	11:44
	← _UniFreak_ left	11:44
thadtheman	Thank you.	11:44
bremner	!myrepos	11:44
	→ dedicated joined	11:45
	→ nettoweb joined	11:45
	← nettoweb1 left	11:46
	→ Anja joined	11:46
	← dedicated_ left	11:48
Torrone	Hello, this is git-related, but not strictly a git question: I work in a company, I am one of the employees who work from home, I'm on the main project and I'm practically doing it all by myself, I can handle doing everything but sometimes I really would like to have someone else working with me, at least to discuss decisions. There's this guy who works at the office, he's nice and he's supposed to be good at javascript stuff, also sup	11:48
	posed to work on the project at some point. When I told him he just needed to git clone he said he couldn't use git, that's fine to me but it makes me doubt his competence, and makes me worry about having to do everything on my own without having anyone else to know the project ( this one involves payments, it's pretty important..) how should I deal with this?	11:48
	→ cdg joined	11:48
donnib	Torrone: why can he not use Git ?	11:49
	→ nettoweb1 joined	11:49
	← nettoweb left	11:50
donnib	Torrone: and what do you need him for ? Review ? Send the code thru other channels if he is not confident to use git	11:50
Torrone	I think he's not accustomed to work at the same standards I'm used to	11:50
donnib	Torrone: unless he starts to code there might be no reason to push him to use your tool just because you need his help	11:51
Torrone	since I've been hired I've struggled to have competent confrontations	11:51
donnib	Torrone: well you are asking for help so he must be skilled in some way or ?	11:51
Torrone	some guys I know for sure that are incompetent, I'm not sure about this one	11:51
	I'm worried to do all the work by myself, I am up to higher standards but it's the first time I have to deal with sensitive stuff like payments	11:52
donnib	Torrone: take it up with the manager or the team and agree on a process of work like integrating Git and integrating review as part of the process to ensure that others also knows about others code	11:53
	← rgb-one left	11:53
Torrone	donnib, I just introduced the joel test t my manager	11:54
donnib	Torrone: now, i don't know the country you are in and what culture you are up agains but in a west european culture i would take this issue (formulated most likely different) with the team like guys i am new and i works some things which i am not comfortable with, how can i involve you into this	11:54
	← gtristan left	11:54
Torrone	I'm from western europe	11:56
donnib	Torrone: it's really is a bad practice in a team to sit with something on your own without sharing it with other especially if it's areas that are new to you,	11:56
	→ roelmonnens joined	11:57
donnib	Torrone: good, talk to the team. you might have a meeting (retrospective) where you can discuss freely and tell the other your opinion in a constructive way without pointing fingers	11:57
	→ elsevero_ joined	11:58
	→ Tobbi joined	11:58
osse	FWIW Git is one of those tools it makes sense to use on a team level. Either everyone is in on it, or you use something else.	11:58
donnib	Torrone: and if you have a competent manager this will be de dealt with, you can suggest to the team to go to use Source Control (i pressume not all do) and choose Git	11:58
	Torrone: then help team adapt Pull Request aka Reviews, let the team know you want this for the best interest for the company/product and help them	11:59
	→ UniFreak joined	11:59
	→ MattMaker joined	11:59
donnib	Torrone: i meet so many teams not knowing they could do better both process wise but also tools/technology because they don't know about them	12:00
selckin	sounds like its a small company tho	12:00
donnib	selckin: yeah i have the same feeling	12:00
Torrone	donnib, yeah, I'm already doing this with the client's IT guy, but I can't always involve him for obvious reasons	12:00
selckin	those things don't really work in small companies	12:00
	→ Levex joined	12:01
donnib	selckin: what doesn't work in samll companies ?	12:01
	← elsevero left	12:01
	elsevero_ → elsevero	12:01
bremner	having managers?	12:01
osse	private armies	12:01
bremner	outsource!	12:01
selckin	teams and talking to team lead, and setting up reviews	12:02
	→ metalraiden34 joined	12:02
osse	The nice thing about private armies is that they can't hang you for treason if you no longer wish to work for them.	12:02
donnib	selckin: i see no reason that it wouldn't work	12:02
selckin	they don't exist	12:02
donnib	selckin: what doesn't exist ? be precise	12:02
	← oaao left	12:02
	← dviola left	12:03
	→ dviola joined	12:03
	→ oaao joined	12:03
	← roelmonnens left	12:03
	→ roelmonnens joined	12:03
	← xissburg left	12:04
Torrone	donnib, the process is fairly organized, I already use source control, pull requests ( since I'm working on other people's code ) and I think I have a pretty decent workflow, my problem is I would sometimes need another competent pair of eyes and I'm not sure I can find them in my company, because I've seen other works from my colleagues and they damn sure are not up to the standards and second because I'm the only one in the company w	12:04
	ho knows the server side language of this particular project	12:04
	← MattMaker left	12:04
	← Andrew_K left	12:05
	← whaley left	12:05
selckin	having expertise in a differend area as you does not make them incompetent	12:07
	be careful before everyone hates you	12:07
	← oaao left	12:07
	→ oaao joined	12:07
	← marcogmonteiro left	12:07
	→ joeco_ joined	12:08
donnib	I agree with selckin	12:08
Torrone	selckin, I'm not saying they're incompetent ( well, I've been handed code from one guy and I can tell that he's incompetent at writing css, but appartently it's the only thing he does). I barely know them and it's difficult for me to estimate their competence	12:09
	← joeco__ left	12:10
	← a_thakur left	12:11
	→ a_thakur joined	12:11
	→ YuGiOhJCJ joined	12:12
Torrone	all I know is that they're nice people and they're all seniors	12:12
	→ xissburg joined	12:12
Torrone	anyway I'll try and talk to my manager, thanks for the advice	12:12
	donnib,	12:13
donnib	Torrone: sure no problem if not revert to my first comment, use them where they have knowledge experience and share your code/whatever you want input on with them in the way THEY feel comfortable	12:13
	→ marcogmonteiro joined	12:14
	← raynold left	12:14
	→ cyberz joined	12:15
	← robattila256 left	12:15
	→ ismithers joined	12:16
	← a_thakur left	12:19
	← psyb0t left	12:19
	← ayogi left	12:19
	→ a_thakur joined	12:19
	← explody left	12:21
	← seni1 left	12:21
	→ psyb0t joined	12:22
	→ thebope joined	12:22
	← zulutango left	12:24
	← StrongBit left	12:24
	→ explody joined	12:25
	→ whaley joined	12:25
	→ mischat_ joined	12:25
	← zeroed left	12:27
	→ al-damiri joined	12:27
	← thebope left	12:27
	← mischat left	12:28
	← acetakwas left	12:29
donnib	osse: i was discussing with someone else earlier on perfomance cost of big repositories and checkout operations, do you know for sure that there is no gain in performance on a checkout operation on a big vs small repo ?	12:30
	← aavrug left	12:32
	→ gtristan joined	12:32
	← cyberz left	12:35
	d1b_ → d1b	12:36
	→ seni1 joined	12:37
	→ nettoweb joined	12:37
	← nettoweb1 left	12:37
	→ mahakal joined	12:38
	→ Masber joined	12:38
	← marcogmonteiro left	12:39
	→ levex_ joined	12:42
	← kristofferR left	12:42
	→ zeroed joined	12:42
	← Levex left	12:43
	← Torrone left	12:44
osse	donnib: what do you mean by performance? MB/s of checked out data during the operation?	12:45
	→ marcogmonteiro joined	12:48
	→ jimi_ joined	12:48
	→ gugah joined	12:49
	→ ayogi joined	12:49
	→ MrMojit0 joined	12:51
	← Tobbi left	12:51
	← xaviergmail_ left	12:53
	← xissburg left	12:53
	← jeffreylevesque left	12:53
	← a_thakur left	12:54
	→ xaviergmail_ joined	12:54
	→ Ardethian joined	12:55
	→ DolphinDream joined	12:56
	→ StrongBit joined	12:57
	→ xissburg joined	12:57
	← raijin left	12:58
	← amdi_ left	12:58
	→ Tobbi joined	13:00
	→ MattMaker joined	13:00
donnib	osse: i am talking about time to checkout	13:00
	← grayjoc left	13:00
	← r_rios left	13:00
donnib	osse: i mean does it take more time to checkout in a big repo vs small repo	13:01
osse	i don't see how it couldn't	13:01
Seveas	repo size matters a bit, but worktree size matters more	13:01
	→ r_rios joined	13:01
osse	ohhh	13:01
donnib	osse: my theory without knowing the details in git is that the pack file is bigger so file operations are slower	13:01
osse	"big repo" = more history?	13:01
donnib	osse: not necessary but big files	13:02
Seveas	pack files are indexed	13:02
	← qpdb left	13:02
selckin	can test this quite easy with like the kernel git repo ? time a bunch of checkouts, then blow away .git, make a single commit, and time again?	13:02
Seveas	so while a big packfile is slower to read, it's not much slower.	13:02
osse	I don't know	13:02
Seveas	"amount of files that need to be checked out" (and their size) will be the biggest cotributing factor	13:03
donnib	so i am thinking that a repo that has let's say 1.5 gb and i clean it (remove some of the big files that was inside git which devs have removed but are stuck) should give me both a clone performance but also checkout but i am not sure	13:03
Seveas	opening, writing and closing 100 files is a lot slower than reading a packfile index.	13:03
	← hussam left	13:04
	← whaley left	13:05
	→ synthroid joined	13:05
	← MattMaker left	13:05
	← ayogi left	13:05
	→ lss8 joined	13:06
	← lss8 left	13:06
	→ lss8 joined	13:06
	→ rgb-one joined	13:06
	← levex_ left	13:08
	→ peacememories joined	13:11
	← rwb left	13:11
	→ cyberz joined	13:12
	← gp5st left	13:13
	→ Sample joined	13:13
	→ jeffreylevesque joined	13:13
	← Dumblez0r left	13:14
	→ jameser joined	13:15
	→ PrashantJ joined	13:16
	← Tobbi left	13:16
	→ thebope joined	13:16
	← Sample left	13:17
	← PrashantJ left	13:17
Timvde	I'm suddenly totally confused about rebase :( If I have a merge conflict during rebase, do I have to commit manually after fixing, or does git rebase --continue do this for me?	13:18
selckin	believe continue does it, have to stage it tho	13:19
Timvde	I guess I could set up a test repo and try, though... But it annoys me that I lack the intuition.	13:19
selckin	you can also commit if you want	13:19
	← DolphinDream left	13:20
	← explody left	13:20
	← jophish_ left	13:20
Timvde	https://stackoverflow.com/questions/6457044/forgot-git-rebase-continue-and-did-git-commit-how-to-fix	13:20
	Okay, looks like I need to just do a rebase --continue	13:20
	← peacememories left	13:21
	← thebope left	13:21
	→ Torrone joined	13:21
selckin	hmm i was sure that was valid to the docs	13:21
	→ Tobbi joined	13:21
	← rgb-one left	13:21
Timvde	selckin: 2011 question, maybe the answers are outdated	13:22
	→ venmx joined	13:22
	→ star_prone joined	13:23
	→ joeco__ joined	13:24
selckin	differend behavior in rebase and rebase -i, that what trips me on it	13:25
	← dgonzo left	13:26
	← venmx left	13:26
	← joeco_ left	13:27
	→ acetakwas joined	13:28
	→ Nilesh_ joined	13:29
	← marcogmonteiro left	13:29
	→ kritzikratzi joined	13:29
	← aard_ left	13:30
	→ explody joined	13:30
	→ Levex joined	13:31
	← rvgate left	13:33
	← bvcosta left	13:33
	→ rvgate joined	13:33
	→ JeroenT_ joined	13:33
	→ kexmex joined	13:34
	→ reynierpm joined	13:34
	← ash_workz left	13:34
	→ Dumblez0r joined	13:34
	→ MattMaker joined	13:35
	← xissburg left	13:35
guardian	hello, when using git rev-list --before=<date> is it the author date or the commiter date?	13:35
reynierpm	I have a few branches locally with some work but I don't want to push them to the origin because it's an uncompleted work and shouldn't be there, now I am moving from one laptop to a brand new and I need to move also such work, what's the best way to achieve this without push all those branches to the origin?	13:35
	→ jameser_ joined	13:35
	→ rgb-one joined	13:36
	→ hussam joined	13:36
	→ ResidentBiscuit joined	13:36
	← JeroenT left	13:37
	← jameser left	13:38
	→ jameser joined	13:38
	→ pk64 joined	13:38
	← jimi_ left	13:39
	→ Ryanar joined	13:39
	gitinfo set mode: +v	13:39
pk64	How do I rebase my patch branch? When I go to rebase, I see commits from what seems to be the master branch, where my patch branch lists my 4 commits, the master has 2 from me + the upsream branch	13:40
	← jameser_ left	13:41
	← GodGinrai left	13:41
	← ismithers left	13:41
	← ResidentBiscuit left	13:41
	→ jameser_ joined	13:41
	→ marcan joined	13:41
	→ xissburg joined	13:41
	→ GodGinrai joined	13:43
	→ mindfart joined	13:43
	← jameser left	13:44
	→ thethorongil joined	13:44
	← jameser_ left	13:44
	← oaao left	13:45
	→ oaao joined	13:45
	→ marcogmonteiro joined	13:46
	→ PrashantJ joined	13:46
	← StrongBit left	13:47
	→ bvcosta joined	13:47
moritz	pk64: generally by checkiing out the branch and doing a "git rebase master"	13:47
PrashantJ	I recently made a PR on github and ran into merge conflicts. This is my very first pool request and I am newbie. Please suggest ways to resolve. Some reference link is appreciated.	13:48
	→ grayjoc joined	13:48
	← scoobertron left	13:48
	← star_prone left	13:49
PrashantJ	For your kind reference : https://github.com/rtnpro/opencabs/pull/8	13:49
pk64	moritz: wouldn't that affect master? I just want to squash the commits I see in the patch-4 branch	13:49
	→ rwb joined	13:50
moritz	pk64: no, it affects the branch you're on.	13:50
pk64	ah ok, thank you. i'll review the rebase doc again as well	13:50
	← qt-x left	13:51
	← thethorongil left	13:51
	← Raging_Hog left	13:51
	← pk64 left	13:52
	← selckin left	13:52
	→ jameser joined	13:53
	→ dedicated_ joined	13:54
	→ scoobertron joined	13:54
	← aspiers left	13:55
rafalcpp	sha1 is broken in practice now. https://shattered.it/	13:55
	when will git move to sha256 or sha512 checksums?	13:55
_ikke_	rafalcpp: It's not that easy	13:56
	← dedicated left	13:57
_ikke_	rafalcpp: Work is underway to not rely on a fix hash lenght, but it's still a lot of work to actually change the hash algorithm	13:57
	→ corentin joined	13:57
corentin	hello	13:57
gitinfo	corentin: hi! I'd like to automatically welcome you to #git, a place full of helpful gits. Got a question? Just ask it — chances are someone will answer fairly soon. The topic has links with more information about git and this channel. NB. it can't hurt to do a backup (type !backup for help) before trying things out, especially if they involve dangerous keywords such as --hard, clean, --force/-f, rm and so on.	13:57
corentin	what about this? http://shattered.io/	13:58
_ikke_	corentin: you're #2	13:58
	rafalcpp: corentin Best place is the !mailing_list	13:58
gitinfo	rafalcpp: The mailing list can be reached via [email@hidden.address] You don't need to subscribe to the list, you will always be put in cc on reply. Read archives at http://j.mp/gitlist	13:58
corentin	will git use a stronger hash algorithm?	13:58
_ikke_	corentin: Probably in the future, but it's not something you can switch over night	13:58
	gitinfo set mode: +v	14:01
	← mischat_ left	14:01
	→ Raging_Hog joined	14:01
	← metalraiden34 left	14:01
	← dvaske_ left	14:01
	← bvcosta left	14:01
	→ mischat joined	14:02
	← JeroenT_ left	14:02
	→ JeroenT joined	14:03
	← pks left	14:03
	← Ryanar left	14:04
	→ pks joined	14:04
	→ aspiers joined	14:04
	→ star_prone joined	14:04
	← bernardio left	14:06
	→ metalraiden34 joined	14:07
	← jameser left	14:08
	→ jimi_ joined	14:09
	← star_prone left	14:09
	→ jameser joined	14:09
	→ kinlo joined	14:09
	→ thebope joined	14:10
	→ Rodya_ joined	14:11
	← jeffreylevesque left	14:12
	← joeco__ left	14:12
	→ jeffreylevesque joined	14:12
	← bgerber left	14:14
	← sbulage left	14:15
	← thebope left	14:15
	← Eryn_1983_FL left	14:15
	→ peacememories joined	14:15
	← nioncode left	14:16
	← i7c left	14:16
	← noctux left	14:16
	→ bgerber joined	14:16
	← jameser left	14:16
	→ DarkPsydeLord joined	14:17
Learath2	_ikke_: seems the archive link is broken	14:17
	← peacememories left	14:17
	→ jameser joined	14:19
	→ peacememories joined	14:19
	← r_rios left	14:19
	→ nioncode joined	14:19
_ikke_	Hmm, right	14:20
	→ r_rios joined	14:20
_ikke_	http://public-inbox.org/git	14:20
	→ noctux joined	14:20
	→ aielima joined	14:21
	← mahakal left	14:21
	→ star_prone joined	14:22
Vampire0	!list	14:23
gitinfo	[!mailing_list] The mailing list can be reached via [email@hidden.address] You don't need to subscribe to the list, you will always be put in cc on reply. Read archives at http://public-inbox.org/git	14:23
	→ mahakal joined	14:23
_ikke_	Vampire0: thanks	14:23
	← aielima left	14:26
	← alexandre9099 left	14:26
	→ Darcidride joined	14:26
	→ alexandre9099 joined	14:26
	→ aielima joined	14:26
	→ Murii_ joined	14:27
	← bannakaffalatta left	14:27
	→ jsho joined	14:27
	→ finalbeta joined	14:27
Vampire0	_ikke_, yw	14:29
	→ Eryn_1983_FL joined	14:29
	← King_Hual left	14:31
	→ King_Hual joined	14:32
	← texinwien_ left	14:32
	→ texinwien_ joined	14:33
	← jon-mac left	14:33
	Guest29403 → murph	14:34
	→ cqi joined	14:34
	← cqi left	14:34
	→ Stummi joined	14:35
	← r_rios left	14:36
Stummi	hey there, just wondering are there any plans for git to rely on other hash algorithms than SHA-1 for commit hashes? (Or maybe is it already possible at all?)	14:36
	→ r_rios joined	14:37
	← r_rios left	14:37
	→ r_rios joined	14:37
osse	Stummi: work has been done. not sure how complete it is	14:37
	e.g. stop hardcoding 20 everywhere	14:37
grawity	see the mailing list for the heaps of object_id patches	14:37
	← MacGyver left	14:38
	← chigang left	14:39
	→ Ryanar joined	14:39
_ikke_	Stummi: You're #3 :P	14:39
	← linuxmodder left	14:40
	← peacememories left	14:40
	← rgb-one left	14:40
	→ ShekharReddy joined	14:40
	← oaao left	14:40
	→ oaao joined	14:41
	← ShekharReddy left	14:41
	→ xissburg_ joined	14:41
	← Raging_Hog left	14:41
	← lamont left	14:42
	← mahakal left	14:42
	← kexmex left	14:43
	← xissburg left	14:43
	→ publio joined	14:44
	→ dragoonis joined	14:44
	→ Es0teric joined	14:45
dragoonis	Hey! I'm building a CI script and would like some advice .. I want to clone down the specific target branch specified by the CI job.. I can clone down the first time, but on the second run I don't want to re-clone the entire repository every time, is there a quicker way? This is my command right now	14:45
	git clone -b ${FURY_BRANCH} --depth=1 --single-branch [email@hidden.address]	14:45
	Let's say FURY_BRANCH changes from 'master' to 'develop'	14:46
	I need it to quickly trash all [potential] dirty changes and switch to the new branch and pull down its code	14:46
	right now I'm doing "rm -rf fury && git clone -b ..."	14:46
	but it's slow ..	14:46
	this repo's .git folder is 900MB	14:47
	→ ResidentBiscuit joined	14:47
	→ BadHorsie joined	14:48
	→ PaulCapestany joined	14:49
	← khfeng left	14:49
	→ linuxmodder joined	14:50
	← xissburg_ left	14:50
	→ khfeng joined	14:50
	→ theoceaniscool joined	14:50
yanome	oh boy, https://security.googleblog.com/2017/02/announcing-first-sha1-collision.html	14:51
	→ crose joined	14:51
	→ mahakal joined	14:52
	→ xissburg joined	14:52
	← ResidentBiscuit left	14:52
	→ peacememories joined	14:52
Vampire0	yanome, you're #4	14:53
	→ nickabbey joined	14:53
bremner	clearly we need a bot command	14:53
moritz	!collision	14:54
Vampire0	bremner, the bot triggers cannot increase the count on each invocation g	14:54
	← xanadu left	14:54
yanome	wait, really?	14:54
	sorry	14:54
Vampire0	no problem	14:54
yanome	what?	14:54
	nobody in my scrollback has posted that link	14:55
	→ github051 joined	14:55
yanome	ah, but i wasn't the first to mention it	14:55
osse	dragoonis: fetch	14:55
Vampire0	yanome, http://shattered.io/	14:55
moritz	dragoonis: git fetch && git checkout -f origin/FURY_BRANCH	14:55
	dragoonis: as a good first step	14:55
osse	dragoonis: the --depth thing will bite you in the end. do a regular clone first and fetch thereafter	14:55
yanome	Vampire0: wneat	14:55
BadHorsie	Is there a way to have git fetch use the same flag as clone --reference ? Trying to use Jenkins but it uses git fetch instead of clone so not sure how to use a local cache (mirror --clone)	14:55
dragoonis	osse, what will happen, the --depth thing saves me SOOO much clone time	14:56
	→ imack joined	14:56
	← peacememories left	14:56
osse	dragoonis: yes, but only the once	14:56
	→ rgb-one joined	14:56
osse	subsequent fetches are fast	14:56
	and depth make them slower (AFAIK)	14:56
	→ kbs joined	14:57
	→ tristanp joined	14:57
	← jameser left	14:58
	← dec0n left	14:58
	← mahakal left	14:58
dragoonis	osse, moritz for my initial clone can I still keep --single-branch, yea?	14:59
osse	yes	14:59
dragoonis	cool deal	14:59
	→ AaronMT joined	15:00
	← github051 left	15:01
	← texinwien_ left	15:01
	← overlord_tm left	15:02
	→ texinwien_ joined	15:02
	→ sbulage joined	15:02
	← nettoweb left	15:03
	← r_rios left	15:03
	→ r_rios joined	15:04
	→ basy joined	15:04
	→ thebope joined	15:05
	→ ash_workz joined	15:05
dragoonis	osse, moritz this is what i've whipped up - what do you think?	15:05
	https://gist.github.com/dragoonis/cd1d45f21121a9f70cbe2f9273689092	15:05
	← Masber left	15:06
_ikke_	yanome: Nice btw that you link to the blog post instead of the marketing page	15:06
	→ mahakal joined	15:06
	→ jameser joined	15:06
	→ BlueMatt joined	15:06
osse	dragoonis: you should checkout origin/blah like moritz said	15:07
	← Torrone left	15:07
dragoonis	cool	15:07
	← jj- left	15:07
	← ferr1 left	15:07
	→ shinnya joined	15:08
	← gugah left	15:08
BlueMatt	heh, re: collision: is there some way to coerce git into giving you a tree hash re-calculated with something other than sha1 (even if super slow)?	15:09
	→ Gsham joined	15:09
	← thebope left	15:09
	← Anja left	15:09
kbs	wondering if that would help (even if done)	15:10
	→ jj- joined	15:10
	← msonntag left	15:10
	→ lowercas_ joined	15:10
BlueMatt	kba: not for many things, but eg signed tags you could just sign that tree hash and publish that elsewhere	15:10
	→ ResidentBiscuit joined	15:10
BlueMatt	would be much nicer than going and sha256ing every file in your repo	15:11
	→ ravi__ joined	15:11
	→ blackwind_123 joined	15:12
	← lowercaseman left	15:12
	→ bannakaffalatta joined	15:12
	← ravi__ left	15:12
kbs	ah, I see	15:12
	→ ravi_ joined	15:12
	→ gugah joined	15:12
	← lowercas_ left	15:13
	→ msonntag joined	15:13
	→ Sample joined	15:14
	→ Hozy joined	15:14
	→ vimal2012 joined	15:14
	← rj1 left	15:15
	→ gugah_ joined	15:15
	→ MacGyver joined	15:15
	← gtristan left	15:16
	← malt3 left	15:16
	→ Torrone joined	15:17
	→ jeffreylevesque_ joined	15:17
	→ LeBlaaanc joined	15:17
	← rchavik left	15:17
	← sasamil left	15:17
	→ malt3 joined	15:17
	← gugah left	15:17
	← Levex left	15:17
	→ shgysk8zer0_ joined	15:18
	← jagob left	15:18
	← MattMaker left	15:18
	← basy left	15:18
	← Sample left	15:19
	← jeffreylevesque left	15:19
	→ varun joined	15:19
	→ aw1 joined	15:19
	varun → Guest63712	15:19
	← texinwien_ left	15:20
	→ dsdeiz joined	15:20
	← dsdeiz left	15:20
	→ dsdeiz joined	15:20
	← jameser left	15:20
	← shgysk8zer0_ left	15:20
	→ texinwien_ joined	15:20
	→ whaley joined	15:21
kbs	Seems reasonable :-) and thinking (naively) correct to assume something like this would need to reformat + then recalculate every object in the full history?	15:21
	← imack left	15:22
	→ denisMone joined	15:22
kbs	(i.e. the embedded 20 byte hashes in each object reference would need to be redone all the way to the starting point)	15:22
	← gugah_ left	15:22
marcan	I imagine forward-migration should be possible	15:23
	← Hozy left	15:23
	→ jameser joined	15:23
	← Dumblez0r left	15:24
	→ e14 joined	15:24
marcan	you'd have to tag and allow both kinds of hashes, then at some point force a cutoff	15:24
	← matoro left	15:24
marcan	you could do that by naming every leaf SHA1 in a SHA-256 object and forbidding any child commits not using SHA-256 after that	15:24
	→ MattMaker joined	15:24
	→ Darren_ joined	15:24
marcan	then, as long as there are no preimage attacks in the future (unlikely), or secret chosen-prefix collision attacks in the present (probably unlikely), you're pretty much safe	15:25
	← metalraiden34 left	15:26
marcan	I guess git already implements the parent/child commit mechanics to allow this, even if the signed trees are dummies. you'd just have a special commit that has as parents all leaf SHA-1 commits and basically "caps" the SHA1 history	15:26
	← GodGinrai left	15:26
	← nickabbey left	15:26
marcan	so the main thing would be adding support for more than one hash algorithm and somehow tagging that in the various binary formats	15:26
	→ varundath joined	15:27
	→ gtristan joined	15:27
kbs	is a "leaf" sha-1 commit the same as a blob object?	15:28
_ikke_	No	15:28
marcan	I mean a commit object	15:28
	dealing with trees and blobs is easy	15:28
	you just enforce that sha-256 commits must reference sha-256 trees and blobs	15:29
_ikke_	marcan: there has been a discussion about this on the mailing list	15:29
marcan	_ikke_: got a link?	15:29
	← MrMojit0 left	15:29
	→ Dumblez0r joined	15:30
_ikke_	marcan: Not sure if this contains what I mean, but this is at least a discussion about it: http://public-inbox.org/git/CAPp-Vrb_n6z39RLHZ4AeUaBFiJfL3_xX8Utfq7+bTgzZrza58Q@mail.gmail.com/	15:30
berndj	what practical steps can high-stakes projects take? identify versions by an n-tuple of the most recent commits, n > 1? (would that even help?)	15:30
	← Ryanar left	15:31
marcan	keep infra secure and sign release tarballs is the obvious way	15:31
	and don't allow force pushing	15:31
_ikke_	Note that git doesn't overwrite existing objects with the same hash	15:31
marcan	right, this is mostly about fresh clones	15:32
	also keep in mind that with the current attack you're mostly safe if you use git for code	15:32
_ikke_	right, it's not a pre-image attack	15:32
marcan	no, it's also not a chosen-prefix attack	15:32
_ikke_	so it's still hard to find a collision for an existing object	15:32
marcan	it's a fixed-prefix attack	15:32
	so you'd have to have malicious code in there from the beginning	15:32
	if you're using git for binaries then you're at risk unless you're carefully vetting those binaries	15:33
	← LeBlaaanc left	15:33
marcan	if you use git for code presumably you actually read said code (if you don't then you're already screwed) so you should be fine	15:33
	for now	15:33
	→ LeBlaaanc joined	15:33
	→ basy joined	15:33
marcan	using the current attack with code would require malicious code to already be present in the repo, triggered conditionally on the collision block	15:33
	← ghoti left	15:33
marcan	that's easy with binaries nobody goes around decompiling. it's easy with PDFs. it's rather hard with source code.	15:34
berndj	marcan, how does signing help? is the signature over something other than the commit id?	15:34
	gitinfo set mode: +v	15:34
marcan	you'd have to sign the whole tree, not the commit object	15:34
varundath	What is the difference between these two git fetch commands.?	15:34
	Command 1: `git fetch origin refs/pull/ID/merge:BRANCHNAME`	15:34
	Command 2: `git fetch origin pull/ID/head:BRANCHNAME`	15:34
marcan	I mean traditional gpg signatures on a tarball	15:34
	→ Droolio joined	15:35
berndj	ok, but making sure that gpg doesn't just use sha1 under the hood	15:35
marcan	sure	15:35
berndj	but yes, perspective: it's a collision attack, not (yet) a preimage attack	15:35
moritz	I think you can configure git to use a message digest algorithm of your choice	15:35
marcan	again, it's not an arbitrary collision attack	15:35
	it's a fixed prefix collision attack	15:35
	the difference is very important	15:35
berndj	although that isn't a guarantee of safety	15:35
marcan	a preimage attack on SHA-1 will likely never happen	15:35
	we don't even have collision attacks on MD2	15:36
	but a fixed prefix collision attack on MD5 you can compute on a smartphone	15:36
	→ Dougie187 joined	15:36
marcan	a chosen prefix collision attack on MD5 is what broke x.509 certs and what the Flame malware used, and you still need a cluster to compute that	15:36
	← Eryn_1983_FL left	15:36
berndj	an attacker could be (or could compromise) a developer with push access, then generate two colliding trees, one benevolent, one malevolent	15:36
marcan	this is a fixed prefix attack on SHA-1	15:36
	berndj: no	15:37
	an attacker could generate two colliding trees, both malevolent, except one might not actually do anything evil	15:37
	moritz wouldn't sign "a preimage attack on SHA-1 will likely never happen"	15:37
	← roelmonnens left	15:37
berndj	well both malevolent wouldn't be useful, as it'd stand out like a sore thumb	15:37
	→ basiclaser joined	15:37
osse	I blame capitalism	15:37
berndj	unless you mean malevolent at the philosophical level	15:37
	→ Eryn_1983_FL joined	15:38
marcan	moritz: okay, in my lifetime, at least not until brute force compute power advances to the point where it's nearly meaningless	15:38
moritz	cryptoanalysis has made some impressive breakthroughs before	15:38
	→ roelmonnens joined	15:38
marcan	berndj: I mean both malevolent	15:38
	today's attack lets you create two files which only differ in one tiny section	15:38
	you can make the rest of the file check that section and behave differently. that's how you get the "evil binary, good binary" or "evil pdf, good pdf" case - buth both are evil, one just doesn't behave in an evil way	15:39
	but you can't do that with code because the if(collision == 1) evil(); else not_evil(); would stick out like a sore thumb	15:39
	you cannot collide good(); //collision1 with evil(); //collision2 with today's attack	15:39
	(you can with the MD5 collision attack that Flame used)	15:39
	that is the important difference	15:39
	← mahakal left	15:39
berndj	printf("Example nonce: 458cbd7fe\n"); /* Show user allowed values. */	15:40
	printf("Example: yes\n"); system("rm -rf /"); /* 7n29c2==28c7 */	15:40
	← PrashantJ left	15:40
marcan	moritz: keep in mind that we don't have a preimage attack on MD2 yet	15:40
berndj	^ like that, marcan	15:40
marcan	berndj: you don't get to pick the contents of the section that changes	15:40
berndj	marcan, that's why it's disguised as a harmless random number	15:41
marcan	where does the "system("rm -rf /");" come from?	15:41
berndj	ok, i'll come up with a better example	15:42
	→ ispn joined	15:42
kbs	Just to offer a gentle diversion from the "is the sky really falling" discussion :-) _ikke_ or others in the know - likely to see something like the mailing list proposal emerge in the next versions or two of git?	15:42
	← texinwien_ left	15:42
	→ Levex joined	15:43
	→ texinwien_ joined	15:43
_ikke_	kbs: No, this is a long term thing	15:43
	→ mischat_ joined	15:44
	← mischat_ left	15:45
	→ mischat_ joined	15:46
	→ mischat__ joined	15:47
	→ Kumool joined	15:48
	← mischat left	15:48
	← Gsham left	15:48
	→ kpease joined	15:48
	→ shgysk8zer0_ joined	15:48
	← star_prone left	15:48
	← Tobbi left	15:48
	→ PCatinean joined	15:49
PCatinean	Hello everyone	15:49
	← rgb-one left	15:49
PCatinean	I got myself into a very complex scenario (not sure how I landed here)	15:50
	→ Wind0r joined	15:50
	← Wind0r left	15:50
	← mischat_ left	15:50
PCatinean	I have a branch that's 20 commits behind the main one, and 48 ahead, after rebase it's 24 commits after, how can thi sbe?	15:50
	→ Wind0r joined	15:51
	← zefferno left	15:51
berndj	marcan, preferred pastebin? pastebin.com ok?	15:51
marcan	whatever works	15:52
	→ miczac joined	15:52
marcan	I run my own private one :P	15:52
	gitinfo set mode: +v	15:52
moritz	PCatinean: does "after" mean "ahead" or "behind"?	15:52
	← miczac left	15:53
PCatinean	ahead moritz sorry	15:53
berndj	marcan, here, my better attempt: http://pastebin.com/UGZMJMZn	15:53
PCatinean	just trying to be sure I don't lose any work	15:53
moritz	PCatinean: sounds imposible	15:53
	→ jstimm joined	15:53
	→ hezekiah joined	15:53
	→ wizeman joined	15:53
moritz	PCatinean: did you git fetch or push in the mean time?	15:54
marcan	berndj: I'd argue that ought to raise eyebrows (also the junk would probably have to be binary)	15:54
moritz	s/impossible/implausible/	15:54
berndj	granted, this pseudo-example uses C, and not all 8-bit values are valid even inside a C comment, and the collision-grinding would need to be repeated until it happens to generate the right prefix to those ifdef / comment bits	15:54
moritz	PCatinean: or did git rebase ask about empty commits several times during the rebase?	15:54
berndj	and it's just a 5-minute proof of concept from a relative n00b, not a serious assault	15:54
	← jameser left	15:54
marcan	berndj: this is the kind of thing the underhanded C code contest is for	15:55
PCatinean	moritz, tehere were 2 conflicts	15:55
	I solved them and then pushed to a separate branch instead of pushing with force on the original one	15:56
	← synthroid left	15:56
	→ Salz joined	15:57
PCatinean	I wonder what's going on	15:58
	→ rgrinberg joined	15:58
PCatinean	moritz, maybe it omits the merges?	15:58
	→ thebope joined	15:59
	→ robotroll joined	15:59
	→ overlord_tm joined	15:59
moritz	the rebase might have flattened out some merges	15:59
	and thus lost some merge commits	15:59
	which might account for a lower total numer of commits afterwards	15:59
PCatinean	hmm	16:00
	The thing is I would want to later merge the changes from dev to master	16:00
	But right now I need some commits from master on dev	16:00
	And I think rebase is the best way to go?	16:00
moritz	it's an option	16:01
	"best" really depends on many factors	16:01
	→ jost__ joined	16:01
	→ rgb-one joined	16:02
	→ tlaxkit joined	16:02
	→ NeXTSUN joined	16:02
	→ DreadKnight joined	16:02
	→ roelmonn_ joined	16:02
	← roelmonn_ left	16:03
	← xissburg left	16:03
	← thebope left	16:03
	→ jagob joined	16:03
DreadKnight	hey, when cloning a repo in a folder I want, how to stop git from cloning the whole thing into a subfolder?	16:03
	← overlord_tm left	16:04
	← Dumblez0r left	16:04
moritz	DreadKnight: git clone <url> destination/	16:04
	← khfeng left	16:04
	← jost_ left	16:04
moritz	DreadKnight: and if into the current directory, git clone <url> .	16:04
	(. = current directory)	16:05
DreadKnight	moritz, did just that and it made a nodejs folder with the whole thing, sigh; will try again	16:05
	→ metalraiden34 joined	16:05
	← roelmonnens left	16:06
	→ Atemu joined	16:08
	← rvgate left	16:08
	← ThomasLocke left	16:09
	→ clemf joined	16:09
	→ kexmex joined	16:09
	→ guest3456 joined	16:10
guest3456	is what they say about Git on this page true?	16:10
	https://shattered.it/	16:10
	← hezekiah left	16:11
moritz	guest3456: it's been discussed here before; please read the logs starting from https://irclog.perlgeek.de/git/2017-02-23#i_14150968	16:12
	← hahuang65 left	16:12
guest3456	will do	16:12
moritz	(note that there were at least two blocks of discussion about this)	16:13
	→ GodGinrai joined	16:13
	← Atemu left	16:13
	← kexmex left	16:13
	→ chardan joined	16:14
	← jstimm left	16:14
	→ nickabbey joined	16:15
	→ whaley_ joined	16:16
	→ ayogi joined	16:19
	← whaley left	16:19
	→ hasc joined	16:19
	← kbs left	16:20
	← basy left	16:21
	→ basy joined	16:22
	→ l4v2 joined	16:22
	→ Emperor_Earth joined	16:23
	← MattMaker left	16:23
	← qqx left	16:23
	→ qqx joined	16:23
	← JeroenT left	16:23
dragoonis	moritz, osse hey	16:23
	git fetch && git checkout -b origin/dockerization	16:23
	fatal: A branch named 'origin/dockerization' already exists.	16:23
	If I'm already on the target branch, it isn't pulling in latest changes for the target branch	16:24
	← GodGinrai left	16:24
	→ GodGinrai joined	16:24
	← thiago left	16:25
GodGinrai	dragoonis: -b creates a branch. You should not be using that flag	16:25
	→ pie__ joined	16:26
	← xaviergmail_ left	16:26
	← texinwien_ left	16:26
	→ CheckDavid joined	16:26
	← de-vri-es left	16:26
	← Es0teric left	16:26
	→ texinwien_ joined	16:26
	→ de-vri-es joined	16:27
	→ xaviergmail_ joined	16:27
pie__	so, given googles practical collision attack, can we get a push for deprecating sha1 in git now :I	16:27
	or if you prefer, "practical"	16:27
	→ lordjancso joined	16:27
	← Alienpruts left	16:28
GodGinrai	pie__: sha1's use in git never had anything to do with security, did it? I thought it was just a reliable way to create unique hashes	16:28
	for git's purpose	16:28
	→ nowhereman joined	16:28
	← e14 left	16:28
	ChanServ changed the topic to: Welcome to #git, the place for git help. Just git help, apparently. \| We are aware of the SHA-1 collision \|Public logs at http://jk.gs/glog \| First visit? Read: http://jk.gs/git \| Current stable version: 2.11.0 \| Getting "cannot send to channel"? /msg gitinfo .voice \| This is serious business. https://madeitwor.se/git-jokes	16:29
	→ Ryanar joined	16:29
dragoonis	GodGinrai, i have a CI script, i'm avoiding deleting and re-cloning the repo every time .. so was looking to have the system just quickly check out the target branch	16:29
	→ Es0teric joined	16:29
	ChanServ changed the topic to: Welcome to #git, the place for git help. Just git help, apparently. \| We are aware of the SHA-1 collision \| Public logs at http://jk.gs/glog \| First visit? Read: http://jk.gs/git \| Current stable version: 2.11.0 \| Getting "cannot send to channel"? /msg gitinfo .voice \| This is serious business. https://madeitwor.se/git-jokes	16:29
perlpilot	heh	16:29
dragoonis	GodGinrai, so I ended up with this: cd $DIR/fury && git fetch && git checkout -b origin/${FURY_BRANCH}	16:29
	→ BSAlb joined	16:30
GodGinrai	dragoonis: you should never use the -b flag with any remote branch name as an argument	16:30
	dragoonis: remote branches are created by git. You are not supposed to create them yourself	16:30
dragoonis	I need something to cover this : a) you're already on the target branch but you want to pull latest changes. b) you're on a branch and want to switch to a new one and pull its latest changes	16:30
_ikke_	GodGinrai: Note that this would create a local branch called origin/..	16:31
perlpilot	dragoonis: you could keep the git clone someplace separate and use rsync to make the branch CI uses match what's in the repo	16:31
GodGinrai	dragoonis: like I said, get rid of the -b. It has nothing to do with what you want to do	16:31
_ikke_	refs/heads/origin/<name> vs refs/remotes/origin/name	16:31
GodGinrai	_ikke_: I know it will. That's a problem	16:31
_ikke_	Just to be sure	16:31
dragoonis	GodGinrai, so "git fetch && git checkout origin/{$TARGET_BRANCH}" will suffice my requirements that I listed ?	16:32
	← ayogi left	16:32
pie__	GodGinrai, well, yeah, i guess. but why not actually make it secure? :/	16:32
_ikke_	dragoonis: as long as you are not planning on comitting, then that works	16:32
	→ Gsham joined	16:32
	→ ayogi joined	16:32
	→ mischat joined	16:32
GodGinrai	pie__: Would you feel the need to secure a stack of free newspapers?	16:32
dragoonis	_ikke_, no committing here.. pulling down the code .. running some tests .. then passing/failing the jenkins build based on the test suite result	16:33
pie__	GodGinrai, secure them from meddling sure	16:33
	i.n.t.e.g.r.i.t.y.	16:33
	← BSaboia left	16:33
	← l4v2 left	16:33
	→ dedicated joined	16:33
_ikke_	Right	16:33
GodGinrai	pie__: you are telling me this attack could allow someone to ruin the integrity of the repo? How?	16:33
_ikke_	pie__: Note that this specific attack is not very usable in git	16:34
	← sbulage left	16:34
pie__	GodGinrai, i havent done my homework, but even if this concrete attack isnt of interest....	16:34
_ikke_	pie__: It's not a pre-image attack, which lets you find a collision for existing data	16:34
pie__	though i suppose i did imply that it has immediate raifications, so i apologize	16:34
	*ramifications	16:35
	→ ToBeCloud joined	16:35
	gitinfo set mode: +v	16:35
dragoonis	GodGinrai, _ikke_ i removed the -b and I get this now: "warning: refname 'origin/dockerization' is ambiguous."	16:35
_ikke_	dragoonis: because you already created a branch called origin/dockerization	16:35
	dragoonis: git update-ref -d refs/heads/origin/dockerization	16:35
dragoonis	Is it safe to ignore this ? it will be repeatedly checking out origin/dockerization on every built	16:36
	← elect left	16:36
	← dedicated_ left	16:36
GodGinrai	dragoonis: see the command _ikke_ just gave you	16:36
	← mischat__ left	16:36
dragoonis	yeah - msg delays	16:36
	thanks i will do this before running the checkout	16:36
_ikke_	dragoonis: You only need to do this once	16:36
dragoonis	fetch && update-ref && checkout	16:36
	_ikke_, not on every CI build?	16:36
_ikke_	dragoonis: no	16:37
	dragoonis: it's because you used -b before	16:37
	← chachasmooth left	16:37
	← DreadKnight left	16:37
dragoonis	_ikke_, alright	16:37
	→ InfoTest joined	16:37
dragoonis	How's this? https://gist.github.com/dragoonis/ee18195bcca15c2687457fcfb05812e9	16:38
	→ MattMaker joined	16:38
GodGinrai	dragoonis: why are you using a pre-existing repo in your CI instead of cloning? Normally, CI is supposed to run stateless	16:38
pie__	_ikke_, its not chosen prefix but its getting there i think?	16:38
	*preimage	16:38
dragoonis	GodGinrai, coz if you clone it, it takes like 10 minutes bcoz the repo is 1GB in size :P	16:39
_ikke_	pie__: Eventually it will, the question is how long it would take	16:39
dragoonis	so it's a one-time clone then a speedy "switch to this branch" thereafter	16:39
	→ chachasmooth joined	16:39
GodGinrai	dragoonis: but if you are just getting the code to test, you could do a shallow clone	16:39
	→ Fallen0223 joined	16:39
_ikke_	GodGinrai: What is wrong with this approach?	16:39
	→ brent__ joined	16:40
pie__	i mean its not like it matters how i feel, but i feel git should have the built in capability to upgrade its algorithm if necessary	16:40
	and that it should do so before something happens not after...	16:40
GodGinrai	_ikke_: if something happens to the repo outside of CI, then the CI can fail for reasons that have nothing to do with anything that actually happened in the code	16:40
_ikke_	pie__: They are working on it, it just takes time	16:40
	← vimal2012 left	16:40
pie__	oh they are?	16:40
_ikke_	GodGinrai: same with shallow clones..	16:40
pie__	last time i looked into it i got the feeling they didnt want to	16:40
GodGinrai	_ikke_: that's only if something happens to the remote repo. I'm talking about the repo local to the CI	16:41
_ikke_	pie__: Someone has been working over the last months / years removing all the hardcoded references to sha1 (length)	16:41
GodGinrai	_ikke_: the one he is fetching into	16:41
pie__	ok,thats coforting :P	16:41
_ikke_	GodGinrai: pie__ The main challenge is backwards compattibility, which they are not sure about yet how to handle)	16:41
pie__	comforting	16:42
osse	cloning takes a long time. fetching takes not as long.	16:42
	← Balliad left	16:42
	← pwndave left	16:42
dragoonis	the .git folder on this repo is 950MB	16:42
_ikke_	I would use git archive then instead of a shallow clone, if you do not require a repo at all..	16:42
dragoonis	mental	16:42
_ikke_	unless you use github, but then you can get an archive from the webinterface	16:42
pie__	_ikke_, i presume its more nuanced but id assume you should just upgrade old repos	16:42
_ikke_	pie__: Like you said, it's more nuanced	16:42
	→ yushyin joined	16:43
	← Gsham left	16:43
GodGinrai	osse: shallow clone wouldn't take as long. Sure, it might still be longer than fetch. But is it worth it to jeopardize the integrity of the tests for faster speeds?	16:43
	← User458764 left	16:43
_ikke_	pie__: It's not that the developers are clueless :)	16:43
osse	what integrity?	16:43
dragoonis	I know for a fact that the client won't delete their repository.	16:43
pie__	_ikke_, ;)	16:44
dragoonis	(if that makes a diff)	16:44
	← Ranhir left	16:44
pie__	well, thanks i guess	16:44
	do you happen to have any mailinglist archive links by any chance?	16:44
	→ pwndave joined	16:44
_ikke_	pie__: https://public-inbox.org/git/CAPp-Vrb_n6z39RLHZ4AeUaBFiJfL3_xX8Utfq7+bTgzZrza58Q@mail.gmail.com/	16:44
GodGinrai	_ikke_: Continuous integration is supposed to be automatic. Where would you get the archive? Set up a hook that uploads an archive whenever the repo changes?	16:44
_ikke_	GodGinrai: git archive	16:44
	→ nettoweb joined	16:45
	← oaao left	16:45
	← elsevero left	16:45
	→ Vampire0_ joined	16:45
	→ matsaman joined	16:45
GodGinrai	_ikke_: git archive only works from within a git repo. You can't use it to pull the code from a remote repo. (unless there is something I'm missing)	16:45
	→ Ranhir joined	16:45
	→ Gsham joined	16:45
_ikke_	GodGinrai: It does work with remote repos	16:46
	→ oaao joined	16:46
	← redeemed left	16:46
_ikke_	Only some services disabled it	16:46
	like github	16:46
	← Vampire0 left	16:46
GodGinrai	_ikke_: wow. I was not aware of this.	16:46
	← zeroed left	16:46
GodGinrai	then yes	16:46
_ikke_	see --remote= option of git archive	16:46
GodGinrai	that would obviously be preferable to a shallow clone	16:46
	assuming that the remote server has this functionality enabled	16:47
	← r_rios left	16:47
osse	I am confused. Our jenkins at work does git fetch && git checkout origin/master. What's bad about that?	16:47
_ikke_	github allows you also to download archives through the webinterface, but that's more limited	16:47
	→ r_rios joined	16:47
	→ zeroed joined	16:49
	← zeroed left	16:49
	→ zeroed joined	16:49
_ikke_	http://github.com/org/project/archive/branch.tar.gz	16:50
	← RxMcDonald left	16:50
_ikke_	Get's you a tarball of the last commit on the branch	16:50
	→ nothingnew joined	16:51
	→ e14 joined	16:52
	← NeXTSUN left	16:52
moritz	but you want meta data like commit hash, last commit etc. for CI purposes, so IMHO that's a poor choice	16:52
_ikke_	pie__: Note that not everyone has the possibility to upgrade, so it cannot be a hard cut-off point	16:52
	→ thebope joined	16:53
moritz	I also expect a CI system to keep a reference cache of a repo around so that it avoids a full clone each time.	16:53
pie__	_ikke_, what would stop them? though i do like the sound of this zsolt fellows idea but i see in the followup emails that thats probably not whats going to happen	16:53
	→ jstimm joined	16:53
	→ Hozy joined	16:54
	← elementalest left	16:54
	→ synthroid joined	16:54
_ikke_	pie__: compattibility	16:55
	← d0nn1e left	16:55
_ikke_	pie__: centos 7 still ships git 1.8.x	16:55
	← Kumool left	16:55
_ikke_	Going to take a while before all git installations are up-to-date	16:55
	→ le_melomane joined	16:55
pie__	i guess you cant force people to update but....	16:56
	give a deprecation deadline	16:56
	→ matoro joined	16:57
	← flaviodesousa left	16:57
	← Gsham left	16:57
	whaley_ → whaley	16:57
	→ d0nn1e joined	16:57
	← thebope left	16:57
	→ redhedded1 joined	16:57
	→ Cyp___ joined	16:58
	← texinwien_ left	17:03
	← Es0teric left	17:03
	→ kbs joined	17:03
	→ Es0teric joined	17:03
	→ texinwien_ joined	17:03
	← r_rios left	17:04
	→ Gsham joined	17:05
	← theoceaniscool left	17:05
	→ User458764 joined	17:05
	← lss8 left	17:06
	← Gsham left	17:06
_ikke_	pie__: https://public-inbox.org/git/alpine.DEB.2.20.1607180905320.28832@virtualbox/	17:06
	→ _xor joined	17:06
	→ thiago joined	17:07
	← clemf left	17:08
	← multi_io left	17:10
	→ clemf joined	17:10
	→ yehowyada joined	17:10
	→ madewokherd joined	17:11
	→ multi_io joined	17:11
	← ayogi left	17:14
	← shinnya left	17:14
	→ Sample joined	17:15
_ikke_	pie__: https://public-inbox.org/git/Pine.LNX.4.58.0504291221250.18901@ppc970.osdl.org/	17:15
	→ imack joined	17:15
_ikke_	(This is what Junio, the git maintainer, replied on the mailing list)	17:15
	← grayjoc left	17:16
	← troulouliou_div2 left	17:16
	← marenz left	17:17
	← MattMaker left	17:17
	→ NeXTSUN joined	17:17
	→ orbyt_ joined	17:17
osse	do you mean linus?	17:17
	→ bvcosta joined	17:18
	← _xor left	17:18
_ikke_	No, I mean junio replied with a link to that post	17:18
	← nickabbey left	17:18
	← orbyt_ left	17:18
	← jnavila left	17:19
	← lordjancso left	17:19
	← chachasmooth left	17:19
	→ nickabbey joined	17:19
	← le_melomane left	17:19
	← varundath left	17:19
osse	it's amazing that i didn't see you posted two links	17:19
	ChanServ changed the topic to: Welcome to #git, the place for git help. Just git help, apparently. \| We are aware of the SHA-1 collision. See: http://jk.gs/t/a3 \| Public logs at http://jk.gs/glog \| First visit? Read: http://jk.gs/git \| Current stable version: 2.11.0 \| Getting "cannot send to channel"? /msg gitinfo .voice \| This is serious business. https://madeitwor.se/git-jokes	17:19
	→ le_melomane joined	17:19
pie__	osse, spacing \o/	17:20
	← Levex left	17:20
	← Sample left	17:20
	← jimi_ left	17:21
_ikke_	"In other words, the security isn't in the hash. The hash is an added level	17:21
	to make it much harder to fool, but it's not "the security". "	17:21
	→ durham joined	17:21
	← le_melomane left	17:22
	← aspiers left	17:22
	→ le_melomane joined	17:23
_ikke_	Junio: "IOW, we want to continue the work to switch from SHA-1, but today's announcement does not fundamentally change anything and we do not panic. "	17:23
	→ chachasmooth joined	17:23
	← nickabbey left	17:24
	→ nostrora joined	17:24
nostrora	Git have to change SHA-1 to another hash function	17:24
	http://shattered.io/	17:24
	Git use SHA-1 right ?	17:24
_ikke_	nostrora: See topic	17:24
	nostrora: https://public-inbox.org/git/CA+55aFxJGDpJXqpcoPnwvzcn_fB-zaggj=w7P2At-TOt4buOqw@mail.gmail.com/T/#m57b6730ba5afee7100870396504edb8c909d5aad	17:24
	→ tyreld joined	17:25
	← texinwien_ left	17:25
_ikke_	nostrora: Junio: "IOW, we want to continue the work to switch from SHA-1, but today's announcement does not fundamentally change anything and we do not panic. "	17:26
	→ MattMaker joined	17:26
	← markmarkmark left	17:27
	→ markmarkmark joined	17:27
	→ texinwien_ joined	17:27
	→ seemikehack joined	17:28
	→ rj1 joined	17:28
	← UniFreak left	17:28
	→ aard_ joined	17:29
	← Droolio left	17:29
	← nostrora left	17:29
	← texinwien_ left	17:30
	→ texinwien_ joined	17:30
	← MattMaker left	17:31
	← kurkale6ka left	17:31
	← dustinm left	17:32
	→ debian joined	17:32
seemikehack	Hey all. We ran across a strange scenario that I was tasked with tracking down, and even though I now know what's happening, I still don't know why. There is a change to a single line in a file that did not get merged from Branch A to Branch B at some point, and no subsequent merges into Branch B from any branch that has the correct line have brought over the change. The line was not modified on Branch B at the time of the merge, so seemingly no	17:32
	conflict would have been generated that could have been improperly handled. Why does the change refuse to propagate to this branch? What could have happened during the initial merge to prevent this? What can be done now to fix it?	17:32
	debian → Guest58404	17:32
	← mikecmpbll left	17:34
	→ nickabbey joined	17:35
	→ svm_invictvs joined	17:35
	← marcogmonteiro left	17:37
	← texinwien_ left	17:38
	← djb-irc left	17:38
	← robotroll left	17:38
	→ texinwien_ joined	17:38
	← mgoodwin left	17:38
	→ marcogmonteiro joined	17:39
rlb	Vampire0_: I wasn't (either way) - thanks, but thinking about it; certainly makes sense. Haven't messed with hooks much.	17:39
Eugene	seemikehack - if the line was deleted as part of conflict-resolution for the merge	17:39
	Its "merged", so re-merging to bring it in doesn't make sense. Add the line manually and move on with life.	17:39
	← irqq left	17:40
seemikehack	Eugene, so basically, there had to have been a merge conflict that was resolved incorrectly that I just don't know about.	17:41
Eugene	seemikehack - or whoever did the merge deleted it. ;-)	17:41
seemikehack	Eugene, OK, thanks for the tip. There really doesn't seem to be any other way it could have happened.	17:41
	← thiago left	17:41
	→ r00twrh joined	17:42
	→ boombatower joined	17:42
	← chardan left	17:43
	← clmsy left	17:43
	→ thiago joined	17:43
	← okjdpi left	17:44
	→ i7c joined	17:44
	← TomyWork left	17:45
	← Ryanar left	17:46
	← dsantiago left	17:46
	← Torrone left	17:46
	→ thebope joined	17:47
	← metalraiden34 left	17:49
	← Rodya_ left	17:49
	← thebope left	17:51
	→ Ryanar joined	17:51
	→ keep_ joined	17:51
	→ coreyfarrell joined	17:52
	← marcogmonteiro left	17:52
	← alexandre9099 left	17:52
	→ ertesx joined	17:53
	→ alexandre9099 joined	17:53
	← chachasmooth left	17:54
	← seni1 left	17:54
	→ gtrmtx joined	17:55
	← Hozy left	17:55
	→ Rodya_ joined	17:55
	→ dustinm joined	17:55
	→ chachasmooth joined	17:55
gtrmtx	how would one go about configuring git to automatically push any time a new commit happens?	17:56
	← coreyfarrell left	17:56
	← texinwien_ left	17:56
	→ texinwien_ joined	17:56
seemikehack	gtrmtx, I've seen clients have an option for that, but otherwise you could probably set up a script to do it for you.	17:56
	← thiago left	17:57
gtrmtx	a script?	17:57
	← ertes left	17:57
	ertesx → ertes	17:57
seemikehack	gtrmtx, a bash script, or an alias, or something.	17:57
	→ thiago joined	17:57
gtrmtx	ok	17:58
	ill have to do some googling	17:58
	← User458764 left	17:58
seemikehack	gtrmtx, see here: http://stackoverflow.com/a/23328996/5269153	17:58
gtrmtx	what about clients? i was unaware that they existed other than gogs...anytime i run git i just do it via ssh	17:58
	→ SwiftMatt joined	17:59
seemikehack	gtrmtx, SourceTree has an option to always commit and push, egit has two buttons for "Commit" and "Commit and Push"	17:59
	→ chardan joined	17:59
gtrmtx	which one do you like more?	17:59
	← Nilesh_ left	18:00
	← mischat left	18:00
	← le_melomane left	18:00
	← shgysk8zer0_ left	18:01
seemikehack	gtrmtx, I prefer SourceTree, but it's only available on Windows and Mac, so I just use egit in Eclipse. There are some standalone clients that wrap egit. If you're on Linux and doing open source work, or are willing to pay, there's also SmartGit, which I really like.	18:01
	gtrmtx, almost forgot, I ran across GitKraken the other day, but haven't investigated it much. I know they have free and paid tiers.	18:02
kritzikratzi	hi! is there a good trick to prevent me from checking in by adding a comment in a source file? (something like /*git-blocki regularly tweak things, and then for	18:02
	→ cagomez joined	18:02
kritzikratzi	ooops, hit enter by accident…. um… yea, something that prevents me from committing, as long as a specific text appears in source	18:02
kadoban	kritzikratzi: You could have a pre-commit hook that checks for banned text of whatever format you like	18:02
kritzikratzi	kadoban: that sounds like what i want. are you using something like this? i don’t want to reinvent the wheel	18:02
seemikehack	gtrmtx, also, surprised I haven't been flamed for this already, but there's also ye olde faithefule git gui and gitk. The other solutions are just more self-contained and easier to get started with.	18:03
kadoban	https://www.emptypath.com/git_pre_commit_testing is what I use (warning: of my own invention). I'm sure there's more well known tools for the job.	18:03
gtrmtx	seemikehack, running everything in linux so sourcetree wont work	18:04
kadoban	It's essentially functionality that's available just out of the box in git, but it doesn't work too well unless you add some stuff on top of it. You don't have to read that whole page, you can skip to the end to see the final result.	18:04
	← ResidentBiscuit left	18:04
	← jalr[m] left	18:04
	← Guest58404 left	18:04
gtrmtx	seemikehack, so i would install smartgit on server, and access it via web interface? or what	18:04
	→ shgysk8zer0_ joined	18:04
seemikehack	gtrmtx, GitEye is the standalone app that wraps egit. It's just an Eclipse RCP app that exposes egit, AFAIK.	18:05
	gtrmtx, all of these options I mentioned are local clients. Are you looking to administrate your own git repository on a server you control?	18:05
gtrmtx	yes	18:05
	i control server	18:05
	all i want to do is automatically push to github anytime i do a git commit on the server	18:06
	← denisMone left	18:06
kadoban	kritzikratzi: Let me know if you need assistance beyond what's provided there. If you're familiar with the 'grep' command that'll be enough to do the test you have to set up.	18:06
	← finalbeta left	18:07
	→ finalbeta joined	18:07
	→ marcogmonteiro joined	18:07
seemikehack	gtrmtx, Hmm, I think this may be an X/Y problem. Why don't you just set up GitHub as your remote?	18:07
	→ hahuang65 joined	18:10
	→ ych joined	18:10
	← Es0teric left	18:10
	→ grayjoc joined	18:10
	← duderonomy left	18:11
	→ ResidentBiscuit joined	18:11
	→ Torrone joined	18:12
	→ dsantiago joined	18:12
	← Torrone left	18:12
	← hahuang65 left	18:14
	← buckowski left	18:15
	← marcogmonteiro left	18:15
	→ User458764 joined	18:15
	← tomaw left	18:16
	→ tomaw joined	18:16
	→ MattMaker joined	18:17
	← kpease left	18:17
seemikehack	gtrmtx, I hate to do this to you, but I've gotta go pick the kiddo up from school and head to lunch. I'll be back in about an hour.	18:18
	← matoro left	18:19
	← d0nn1e left	18:20
	→ Tobbi joined	18:20
	→ orbyt_ joined	18:20
	→ buckowski joined	18:21
	→ DaveTaboola joined	18:21
	→ le_melomane joined	18:22
	→ dreiss joined	18:22
	→ hahuang65 joined	18:23
	→ jnavila joined	18:23
	→ crayon joined	18:24
	← chachasmooth left	18:24
	→ jimi_ joined	18:25
	← hasc left	18:26
	← DaveTaboola left	18:26
	→ chachasmooth joined	18:27
	← MattMaker left	18:27
	→ kpease joined	18:29
	→ theoceaniscool joined	18:30
gtrmtx	seemikehack, youre good...when you get back, i think maybe thats how i did it?	18:30
	→ HardlySe1n joined	18:31
	← tlaxkit left	18:31
	← HardlySe1n left	18:31
	→ durham_ joined	18:31
	← durham_ left	18:32
	→ durham_ joined	18:32
gtrmtx	my first command was git remote add origin [email@hidden.address]	18:32
	← orbyt_ left	18:33
	→ jedahan joined	18:33
	← durham left	18:35
	← kpease left	18:36
	→ j7k6 joined	18:36
	→ oleksiyp joined	18:36
	→ d0nn1e joined	18:38
	← zeroed left	18:38
	← Spydar007 left	18:38
	← bongjovi left	18:39
	→ Gsham joined	18:40
	→ metalraiden34 joined	18:40
	→ thebope joined	18:41
	→ matoro joined	18:41
	← rj1 left	18:42
	← oleksiyp left	18:43
	← eroux left	18:43
	← texinwien_ left	18:43
	→ Spydar007 joined	18:43
	← Spydar007 left	18:43
	→ Spydar007 joined	18:43
	→ texinwien_ joined	18:44
	← whaley left	18:45
	→ MattMaker joined	18:45
	→ kpease joined	18:45
	← thebope left	18:45
	→ robotroll joined	18:46
	← prg3 left	18:46
	→ fatalhalt joined	18:47
	→ prg3 joined	18:47
	→ nidr0x joined	18:47
	← le_melomane left	18:49
	← jwest left	18:49
	← texinwien_ left	18:50
	← jnavila left	18:50
	→ CAPRA-MAU joined	18:50
	→ le_melomane joined	18:50
	← basiclaser left	18:51
	← ToBeCloud left	18:51
	← CAPRA-MAU left	18:51
	→ texinwien_ joined	18:51
	→ aspiers joined	18:52
	→ mikecmpbll joined	18:52
	Vampire0_ → Vampire0	18:54
	← AciD` left	18:54
	→ PrashantJ joined	18:54
	→ iliekcomputers joined	18:55
	→ mablae joined	18:55
	→ Es0teric joined	18:56
	→ duderonomy joined	18:56
	→ timetrex joined	18:56
	← Tobbi left	18:57
	→ TomyLobo joined	18:58
	← iliekcomputers left	18:58
	← jedahan left	18:58
	→ NullableTruth joined	18:58
	← thiago left	18:59
	→ joki joined	19:00
	← alexandre9099 left	19:00
	→ alexandre9099 joined	19:01
	← matoro left	19:02
	← InfoTest left	19:03
	← metalraiden34 left	19:03
	← afuentes left	19:03
kritzikratzi	kadoban: thx, that’s a great start. already playing with it.	19:03
	← durham_ left	19:04
	→ OerHeks joined	19:05
	→ durham joined	19:05
	← texinwien_ left	19:05
	→ jwest joined	19:05
	→ texinwien_ joined	19:05
kadoban	kritzikratzi: Cool, glad to help. Feel free to let me know if you run into any trouble with it.	19:06
kritzikratzi	a few things are different as i’m on osx, but i’m getting there :)	19:07
	← cdg left	19:07
	← cagomez left	19:07
	→ matoro joined	19:07
	→ cagomez joined	19:07
	→ eroux joined	19:07
	→ j7k6_ joined	19:08
	→ gopar joined	19:08
	→ jedahan joined	19:08
kadoban	Ahh osx, interesting. crosses fingers I definitely never tested there, though as I recall I made some effort to make it vaguely platform-neutral.	19:09
kritzikratzi	simple things are different, like ln doesn’t support „dash-dash“ arguments	19:10
	→ m0viefreak joined	19:10
kadoban	Ooo, hmm.	19:10
	That's unfortunate. I should figure those out, probably not too too hard to be more general	19:10
	← j7k6 left	19:11
	← intellix left	19:11
kritzikratzi	no, but a pain… and no big deal for me to change	19:11
	← e14 left	19:12
	→ intellix joined	19:12
kadoban	I bet that means it's borked on BSDs as well	19:13
	→ irqq joined	19:13
	← jimi_ left	19:13
	← hahuang65 left	19:14
	→ Sasazuka joined	19:14
	→ pjdowson joined	19:14
	→ overlord_tm joined	19:14
	→ peterbec` joined	19:14
	→ jimi_ joined	19:14
	← pjdowson left	19:14
	→ dedicated_ joined	19:15
	← Gsham left	19:15
	← wizeman left	19:16
	← nickabbey left	19:16
	→ Sample joined	19:16
	← navidr left	19:16
	→ nickabbey joined	19:16
	← bvcosta left	19:16
	← dedicated left	19:16
	← theoceaniscool left	19:17
	→ oleksiyp joined	19:17
	← oleksiyp left	19:17
	→ Mof joined	19:18
	← MattMaker left	19:18
	← eroux left	19:18
	→ jnavila joined	19:19
	→ Gsham joined	19:19
	→ jdl joined	19:20
	← nickabbey left	19:20
	→ oleksiyp joined	19:20
	→ metalraiden34 joined	19:20
	→ nickabbey joined	19:20
	← PrashantJ left	19:20
	→ j7k6 joined	19:21
	← durham left	19:21
	← Sample left	19:21
	← bocaneri left	19:22
	→ thiago joined	19:22
	← Zialus left	19:22
	← grayjoc left	19:22
	← j7k6_ left	19:23
	← synthroid left	19:23
	→ hahuang65 joined	19:23
	← texinwien_ left	19:23
	→ synthroid joined	19:23
	→ m4sk1n joined	19:23
	→ texinwien_ joined	19:24
	← oleksiyp left	19:25
	→ joeco joined	19:26
	← timetrex left	19:26
	→ orbyt_ joined	19:26
kritzikratzi	kadoban: i think it does something funny to empty directories	19:27
	(like…delete them)	19:27
	← synthroid left	19:28
	← thiago left	19:28
	→ thiago joined	19:28
ojacobson	Git does not have a representation of an empty directory (or of directories at all, really). Common convention is to put a .gitkeep or empty .gitignore file in any directory that needs to exist on checkout but has no content	19:29
kadoban	kritzikratzi: Hmm, interesting. I wonder if I've just never run into that or if the behavior is different.	19:29
	← SwiftMatt left	19:29
	→ cdg joined	19:29
ojacobson	(The database representation can store empty directories, but the staging area can't.)	19:29
	→ mischat joined	19:29
	← grawity left	19:30
	→ Atm0spher1c joined	19:30
	← hahuang65 left	19:30
	→ b1tchcakes joined	19:30
	← r00twrh left	19:31
	→ grawity joined	19:32
	→ MattMaker joined	19:32
	→ dvaske_ joined	19:33
	← aw1 left	19:34
	← Murii_ left	19:34
kadoban	kritzikratzi: I can't tell if I'd expect that behavior or not, or if so if there's a way I can work around that. I'll take a peek tonight though.	19:34
	← cdg left	19:34
	→ cworo joined	19:34
	→ Murii_ joined	19:35
kritzikratzi	kadoban: i don’t think it matters at all! was just a random funky case i came across	19:35
	→ thebope joined	19:35
kritzikratzi	here’s what i got so far: https://asdfg.me/up/git-hooks.zip	19:35
	→ oleksiyp joined	19:35
	← Murii_ left	19:35
kritzikratzi	seems to do what i want, maybe i’ll put it on github soon if it turns out stable and fast enough	19:35
	now i installed it globally, which i find more convenient	19:36
	kk, gotta run… dinner time,	19:36
	kadoban: thx again for your help!	19:36
kadoban	Ya, if it's a case I can handle better I'd like to though. Cool beans, have a good dinner. Ya, anytime.	19:36
	← acetakwas left	19:36
	→ sharpdream joined	19:36
	→ e14 joined	19:37
	→ Murii_ joined	19:37
	← Murii_ left	19:37
	← imack left	19:37
	→ elsevero joined	19:37
	→ Murii_ joined	19:38
	← Murii_ left	19:38
	→ Sample joined	19:39
	→ Murii_ joined	19:39
	← thebope left	19:39
	← Murii_ left	19:40
	→ Murii_ joined	19:40
	→ roelmonnens joined	19:40
	← Murii_ left	19:41
	→ kexmex joined	19:41
	→ sieve joined	19:42
	→ Murii_ joined	19:42
	→ durre joined	19:42
	→ lamont` joined	19:43
	← Murii_ left	19:43
	← matoro left	19:43
	← ronny left	19:43
	→ Murii_ joined	19:43
sieve	We currently have some microservices (5 or so) which we are currently deploying with docker and puppet to AWS EC2 instances. I'm wondering if it might be socially acceptable to just deploy the code with git and then have a cron job that pulls master every x mins.	19:44
	← Murii_ left	19:44
	→ durham joined	19:44
	→ hahuang65 joined	19:44
sieve	Throw away all the docker and puppet stuff.	19:44
	← texinwien_ left	19:44
	← kexmex left	19:44
	← NeXTSUN left	19:44
	← lamont` left	19:44
sieve	Which seems to mostly cause annoyance and complications	19:44
	→ lamont` joined	19:45
	← thiago left	19:45
	← roelmonnens left	19:45
	← Virox left	19:45
	← Sasazuka left	19:46
	→ texinwien_ joined	19:46
	→ aw1 joined	19:47
sonOfRa	Does signing a git commit actually sign the entire object, or just the hash of the commit?	19:47
	lamont` → lamont	19:47
grawity	it signs the object minus the signature header	19:47
	→ dedicated joined	19:47
bremner	sieve: well, you can have a look at !deploy	19:48
gitinfo	sieve: Git is not a deployment tool, but you can build one around it (in simple environments) or use it as an object store(for complex ones). Here are some options/ideas to get you started: http://gitolite.com/deploy.html	19:48
	→ Virox joined	19:48
	→ Sasazuka joined	19:48
	→ thiago joined	19:49
grawity	not that it matters much, since the commit references the data by tree hash	19:49
	← dedicated_ left	19:49
sonOfRa	grawity: it matters if you insert an evil colliding SHA1 :)	19:49
	The question is whether a signature for a good commit is also valid for an evilly forged commit with the same SHA1, but actually different code changes	19:50
grawity	sonOfRa: it doesn't, because you can insert colliding sha1's at any place	19:50
	if you sign the commit, you can collide the tree hash	19:50
	or a subtree hash	19:50
	or a blob hash	19:50
	→ synthroid joined	19:51
	→ dedicated_ joined	19:51
	← c0c0 left	19:52
	← dedicated left	19:53
	← OerHeks left	19:53
	← texinwien_ left	19:55
	← bket left	19:55
	← styx__ left	19:55
	← styx_ left	19:55
	← durham left	19:55
	→ whaley joined	19:56
	→ durham joined	19:56
	→ dsantiag_ joined	19:56
	← cworo left	19:56
	← le_melomane left	19:57
	→ texinwien_ joined	19:57
	← FilipNortic left	19:58
	← dsantiago left	19:58
	← Sample left	19:58
	→ FilipNortic joined	19:58
	→ Anja_ joined	19:58
	← jstimm left	20:00
	← chll_ left	20:01
	→ kexmex joined	20:02
	→ le_melomane joined	20:03
	→ rumble joined	20:03
	→ sharp_dream joined	20:04
	→ livingstn joined	20:04
	← rgrinberg left	20:06
	← meLon left	20:06
	← grumble left	20:07
	rumble → grumble	20:07
	← jedahan left	20:07
	← rgb-one left	20:07
	← CrypticGator left	20:07
	← sharpdream left	20:07
	→ CrypticGator joined	20:08
	→ bket joined	20:08
	← dvaske_ left	20:08
	← Ryanar left	20:09
	→ khfeng joined	20:09
	→ Flaghacker joined	20:09
	→ meLon joined	20:09
	← CussBot left	20:10
	→ CussBot joined	20:10
	← Fallen0223 left	20:10
	→ Fallen0223 joined	20:10
	← le_melomane left	20:11
	← CrypticGator left	20:11
	→ le_melomane joined	20:12
	→ jedahan joined	20:12
	← grawity left	20:12
	← CussBot left	20:14
	→ CussBot_ joined	20:14
	CussBot_ → CussBot	20:14
	← PCatinean left	20:15
Flaghacker	Hey guys! I have a sequence of commit, A -> B -> C, and I would like to remove B. I already tried "git rebase -p --onto B^ B" but that didn't change anything. How can I do this?	20:16
	→ Decorater joined	20:16
Decorater	uh	20:16
Eugene	Flaghacker - !fixup	20:16
gitinfo	Flaghacker: So you lost or broke something or need to otherwise find, fix, or delete commits? Look at http://sethrobertson.github.com/GitFixUm/ for full instructions, or !fixup_hints for the tl;dr. Warning: changing old commits will require you to !rewrite published history!	20:16
Decorater	Where can I find the git bugtracker	20:16
	← cagomez left	20:16
	← peterbec` left	20:16
Flaghacker	Eugene, Yea that was the site that told me to execute that command, but it didn't work.	20:16
moritz	!bug	20:17
gitinfo	[!bugtracker] the developers of git don't use a bug tracker. If you want to report a bug, send an e-mail to the mailing list at [email@hidden.address] (no subscription required; everyone uses "reply to all" when responding); you can review past discussions at http://public-inbox.org/git	20:17
Eugene	!repro	20:17
gitinfo	[!transcript] Please paste (using https://gist.github.com/ or similar) a transcript ( https://git.io/viMGr ) of your terminal session so we can see exactly what you see	20:17
	→ cagomez joined	20:17
	← robotroll left	20:17
Decorater	I would like to report 2 bugs that I experianced in Windows before on cygwin, cygwin64,mingw, and the mingw64 bit versions	20:17
	ah	20:17
	← texinwien_ left	20:17
	← cagomez left	20:18
	→ rgb-one joined	20:19
	→ ahr3n joined	20:21
	← livingstn left	20:22
	← le_melomane left	20:22
	→ texinwien_ joined	20:23
	→ peterbec` joined	20:23
	← Rodya_ left	20:26
Flaghacker	Eugene, I'm sorry that took so long, rebase is very slow for some reason: https://gist.github.com/flaghacker/546bbc4d415c1cbaeb3b7c78d10be3c2	20:26
	→ thebope joined	20:26
	→ Rodya_ joined	20:27
Decorater	there is 2 bugs I encountered with rebase that I am emailing now.	20:27
	that is on Windows	20:27
	ok emailed	20:27
	← Es0teric left	20:27
	← chardan left	20:28
Decorater	Also anyone know if I can somehow use MSVC to compile git to be standalone so users do not have to have cygwin, cygwin64, mingw, or even mingw64?	20:28
	→ aidalgol joined	20:28
Decorater	Also my git version	20:29
	$ git --version git version 2.11.0.windows.1	20:29
	→ snowalpaca joined	20:29
	← synthroid left	20:30
	← sharp_dream left	20:30
	← texinwien_ left	20:30
	← s1scha left	20:31
	← jedahan left	20:31
	← Rodya_ left	20:31
	→ Wza joined	20:31
Flaghacker	Eugene, Any idea what I'm doing wrong?	20:32
	→ texinwien_ joined	20:32
	→ Es0teric joined	20:32
perlpilot	Flaghacker: you could try an interactive rebase (I don't see that you're doing anything wrong)	20:33
	Flaghacker: what version of git are you using?	20:33
	→ LiftLeft joined	20:33
	→ hasc joined	20:33
Flaghacker	perlpilot, git version 2.5.1.windows.1	20:34
	→ jedahan joined	20:34
	← hasc left	20:34
Flaghacker	I'll an interactive rebase (once I figured out whta that id)	20:34
	→ hasc joined	20:34
perlpilot	Flaghacker: git rebase -i d70f2ca # then just remove the commit that you don't want anymore	20:34
	→ Sample joined	20:35
perlpilot	Flaghacker: It will put you in your editor to edit the commits. Dunno what that's likely to be for you.	20:35
	→ gugah joined	20:35
	← reynierpm left	20:35
	← texinwien_ left	20:36
perlpilot	Flaghacker: random thought ... is your shell eating the ^ somehow?	20:36
	→ grawity joined	20:36
Flaghacker	perlpilot, The one that has ":wq" for save-and-exit. I thought it was Linux thing...	20:37
mloy	vi/m	20:37
	← User458764 left	20:37
perlpilot	according to my 15 seconds of googling, ^ is special to cmd.exe in some way	20:38
	← Mindi left	20:38
	→ texinwien_ joined	20:39
	→ UTAN_dev joined	20:40
perlpilot	Flaghacker: so ... you could try git rebase --onto "769c251^" 769c251 (or whatever the appropriate quoting is)	20:40
Eugene	Yup, windows ^ would be it	20:40
Flaghacker	perlpilot, That would expalian a lot of stuff... I've had problems in the past but I always ended up using a workaround instead.	20:40
Eugene	: and { are also special	20:40
	← shgysk8zer0_ left	20:41
	← yehowyada left	20:41
perlpilot	Eugene: what does it do with ^ ? I haven't used Windows in forever. : and { make sense, but I don't have a clue about ^	20:41
	→ jimsio joined	20:41
	→ griffindy joined	20:42
	← LiftLeft left	20:42
Eugene	http://www.robvanderwoude.com/escapechars.php	20:42
Flaghacker	Yes it's rebasing, taking a loooong time yet again.	20:42
	← jeffreylevesque_ left	20:42
kritzikratzi	kadoban: i’ve just put in on github under the same license now: https://github.com/kritzikratzi/git-forbid	20:42
perlpilot	ah, they use ^ instead of \ because of the path thing. Makes some sense	20:42
Eugene	Unless you're using a literal \\!	20:42
	Or worse, a literal "\\\!"	20:43
	(Which is \!)	20:43
	← dsdeiz left	20:43
Eugene	(Maybe?)	20:43
	Lesson: don't trust cmd	20:43
perlpilot	I thought the lesson was to use Linux? ;)	20:43
Eugene	Gods no, linux is way worse about insane made-up standards	20:44
	If you want a well-documented understandable system, find an old copy of System V Unix and type it in yourself	20:44
	Bonus points if it was photocopied	20:44
perlpilot	no love for NetBSD or FreeBSD?	20:45
Decorater	or even OpenBSD^	20:45
	→ robattila256 joined	20:45
	→ bvcosta joined	20:45
Eugene	Their source doesnt' fit in a 3-ring binder	20:45
Decorater	also anyone got an idea with these issues on git rebase (2.11.0.windows.1) http://public-inbox.org/git/CAHikyLoK-h4tY_rxGikaSSv6AmcrBAXiayDFTtLa44A9qMZDqA@mail.gmail.com/	20:45
	← texinwien_ left	20:46
Flaghacker	perlpilot, Interactive rebase worked, thanks!	20:47
	→ texinwien_ joined	20:47
Flaghacker	Does anyone happen to know why git rebase would be very slow? It doesn't use that much CPU, memory or disk, it just takes a couple of minutes to fininsh.	20:48
Decorater	https://github.com/AraHaan/TinyURL an repo where the rebase bugs on as well	20:48
_ikke_	Flaghacker: What OS?	20:48
Flaghacker	_ikke_, Windows 10	20:49
perlpilot	Flaghacker: You aren't using git over an SMB share are you? (or CIFS, if that makes more sense)	20:49
	→ askb joined	20:49
Decorater	I am using Windows 7 Ultimate SP1 Build 7601	20:49
	x64^	20:49
Flaghacker	perlpilot, The whole project (including .git etc) is 1.6MB if that's what you're asking.	20:50
	← peterbec` left	20:50
_ikke_	Flaghacker: What version of git are you using?	20:50
Flaghacker	oops I misread SMB as 5MB	20:50
	_ikke_, git version 2.5.1.windows.1	20:50
perlpilot	Flaghacker: get a better font :)	20:50
	← Wza left	20:50
	← GodGinrai left	20:50
Flaghacker	And no, perlpilot, it's not on a share.	20:50
_ikke_	Flaghacker: You might want to use a newer version. THe maintainer of git for windows ported some part of git rebase to native c, increasing it's performance a lot	20:51
	→ peterbec` joined	20:51
	→ Mindi joined	20:51
Decorater	on Windows try to use git v 2.11.0.windows.1	20:51
	→ MicronXD joined	20:51
_ikke_	Flaghacker: Rebase is/was written in bash, causing a lot of forks. In linux, this is cheap, in windows, not so	20:51
Decorater	and then you will notice some bugs I got with rebase	20:51
	it is not slow for me, it just has bugs	20:51
	→ synthroid joined	20:51
	← peterbec` left	20:51
_ikke_	Decorater: What kind of bugs?	20:51
Flaghacker	Is there an easy way to update git?	20:52
moritz	depends on your OS and/or package manager	20:52
Decorater	1 that if I do git rebase -i -root and on all commits change pick to edit and append ``-S`` to every one that all of the commits get merged	20:52
Flaghacker	moritz, W10 so no package manager :(	20:52
	→ ryant joined	20:52
_ikke_	Flaghacker: Just download the latest installer	20:52
	should be pretty easy	20:53
Decorater	and then there is another one where if I clone a repo on Windows and not on github desktop and that I placed commits to the repo on github web and then when I rebase to squash the commits to 1 commit (some repos are doing it as a requirement for 1 commit PR's) that all of my commits on the remote (fork in this case) that is linked to an open pull request are discarded and then the pull request is somehow and oddly closed. It is super	20:53
	← Dougie187 left	20:53
perlpilot	Flaghacker: I found https://git-scm.com/download/win from google :)	20:53
MicronXD	I'm afraid I'm totally screwed. Is there anyone who's managed to unscrew an accidental `stash pop` during a rebase?	20:53
moritz	Flaghacker: good news for you: https://chocolatey.org/	20:53
	→ peterbec` joined	20:53
	← texinwien_ left	20:53
	← prg3 left	20:53
	← diogenese left	20:53
_ikke_	MicronXD: Can you post a !transcript?	20:53
gitinfo	MicronXD: Please paste (using https://gist.github.com/ or similar) a transcript ( https://git.io/viMGr ) of your terminal session so we can see exactly what you see	20:53
Flaghacker	moritz, That's look very interesting, I've been wishing for this a long time. I'll check it out, thanks.	20:54
	→ fatalhalt_ joined	20:54
	→ Tobbi joined	20:54
perlpilot	MicronXD: Usually git saves you from screwing yourself. Have hope!	20:54
	← peterbec` left	20:54
moritz	Flaghacker: full disclosure, I haven't used it myself, but have come across it in several podcasts and/or blog posts	20:54
Decorater	yeah unless you need to edit every commit from root to gpg sign them to append -S then it acts up and merges all commits you have to 1	20:54
moritz	(not a windows user)	20:54
Decorater	(where you lose all the history)	20:55
perlpilot	Decorater: even then you didn't lose history, just made it slightly harder to get to.	20:55
	← fatalhalt left	20:55
	→ peterbec` joined	20:55
MicronXD	perlpilot: is there a way to restore my stash and abort my rebase?	20:56
	← peterbec` left	20:56
Decorater	yeah, at least I did not do git pull --force it before git log to show the commits and signitures	20:56
	so then all I had to do was reclone	20:56
	← bvcosta left	20:56
perlpilot	MicronXD: do what _ikke_/gitinfo said.	20:57
	→ peterbec` joined	20:57
perlpilot	MicronXD: it's harder to tell without a transcript.	20:57
MicronXD	perlpilot: _ikke_: https://gist.github.com/MicronXD/db55d48f3ad6ac81eaa3bedaa91d860e	20:58
perlpilot	MicronXD: btw, I've found "git stash pop" annoying, so I tend to "git stash apply" and "git stash drop" separately.	20:58
	MicronXD: you might want to start doing the same :)	20:58
	← sieve left	20:58
_ikke_	MicronXD: I don't think the stash got applied	20:59
	→ diogenese joined	20:59
_ikke_	MicronXD: You can use git stash list to verify	20:59
	→ xissburg joined	20:59
Decorater	also is there a way I can drop an extra merge commit that is shown on github but not in git?	21:00
_ikke_	I think you are just in a regular rebase conflict	21:00
Decorater	even if I open it in rebase	21:00
	→ perohig joined	21:00
_ikke_	Decorater: rebase by default never shows merges	21:00
	← snowalpaca left	21:00
Decorater	hmm could you somehow force rebase to show them though?	21:00
	→ snowalpaca joined	21:01
_ikke_	--preserve-merges	21:01
	But if you want to get rid of a merge, then you obviously don't want that	21:01
Decorater	Well lets say the merge commit does nothing	21:01
	as a few commits on github has the data it has and well when I got the changes from github it wanted to do an merge commit instead	21:02
	so essentially that merge commit should be deleteable	21:02
	← oleksiyp left	21:02
MicronXD	_ikke_: I updated this gist. https://gist.github.com/MicronXD/db55d48f3ad6ac81eaa3bedaa91d860e I see a message reading "stash@{0}: WIP on Settings-Flux-Additions: 4bce9bd Setting-Flux" followed by a list of messages that I presume were generated by the GitHub desktop app	21:02
	← peterbec` left	21:02
	← CussBot left	21:02
	← perohig left	21:03
	← dviola left	21:03
	→ peterbec` joined	21:03
	→ LiftLeft joined	21:04
_ikke_	MicronXD: You can run git rebase --abort to get back to the state before the rebase	21:04
	→ jeffreylevesque joined	21:04
MicronXD	I tried `git stash show -p`, but it's only showing 3 modifications (there were a probably 10-15)	21:04
	→ CussBot joined	21:04
	→ sieve joined	21:04
MicronXD	_ikke_: will that restore the stash though?	21:04
	← ryant left	21:04
Decorater	like the top commit on this screenshot contains all the data that I pushed before it and those commits are also in the screenshot. (The top one should be deleted) http://puu.sh/ugO93/6a195377df.png	21:05
_ikke_	MicronXD: git stash pop doesn't drop in case of conflicts	21:06
	→ livingstn joined	21:06
_ikke_	MicronXD: And in this case, it didn't even apply I believe	21:06
	← thiago left	21:06
MicronXD	_ikke_: oh thank god	21:07
	← Es0teric left	21:07
	← cdesai left	21:07
	→ texinwien_ joined	21:08
	→ Es0teric joined	21:08
	← aidalgol left	21:08
	← rt left	21:08
_ikke_	Decorater: Did you just sent something to the mailing list?	21:08
	← nettoweb left	21:08
Decorater	yeah	21:08
_ikke_	Note that git for windows has it's own bug tracker	21:09
	→ Uesg joined	21:09
	→ rt joined	21:10
	→ Budyn joined	21:10
	→ cdesai joined	21:10
_ikke_	https://github.com/git-for-windows/git/issues	21:10
	Decorater: Or do you believe this is not just related to git for windows?	21:10
Decorater	I think it is related to git in general	21:10
	← Mof left	21:10
	← finalbeta left	21:11
	→ finalbeta joined	21:11
	→ exitcode1 joined	21:12
Flaghacker	I updates to 2.11 and rebase still is very slow. It'll probably be something with my pc I gueess.	21:12
_ikke_	alright	21:12
	Decorater: It would have been better if you included what version of git you are using	21:13
Decorater	2.11.0	21:13
	← xaviergmail_ left	21:13
	← MicronXD left	21:14
_ikke_	Right, but the people reading the mailing list don't read this :)	21:14
	→ xaviergmail_ joined	21:14
	→ mwfires joined	21:15
	→ cagomez joined	21:15
	→ MicronXD joined	21:16
	→ cdg joined	21:16
	← MicronXD left	21:16
	← snowalpaca left	21:16
	← livingstn left	21:16
_ikke_	Decorater: So you do git rebase --root -i, and change everything to edit, and then save+exit, and then everything is squashed?	21:16
	← texinwien_ left	21:17
	← kritzikratzi left	21:17
	← mwfires left	21:17
Decorater	yes	21:17
	← sieve left	21:17
Decorater	I do edit to add gpg to the commits	21:17
_ikke_	Seems to work for me	21:17
	→ mwfires joined	21:17
Decorater	hmm	21:18
	→ matoro joined	21:18
_ikke_	I had a repo with 2 commits	21:18
	did git rebase --root -i	21:18
	changed both to edit	21:18
	and it allowed me to edit both commits	21:18
	and the resulting branch still had 2 commits	21:18
	(I'm on linux btw)	21:18
	← Budyn left	21:19
	→ Budyn joined	21:19
	← Budyn left	21:20
	→ [Brain] joined	21:20
	→ Budyn joined	21:20
	→ ronny joined	21:21
	← Shakeel__ left	21:21
Decorater	hmm	21:23
	I see	21:23
	← overlord_tm left	21:23
Decorater	can you reporduce the clone part too where you placed commits using git web and then when you rebase those that are for an PR that it discards those commits magically?	21:24
	← kexmex left	21:24
	→ rmb joined	21:26
	→ texinwien_ joined	21:27
	← nothingnew left	21:28
	← synthroid left	21:28
	→ cgdub joined	21:28
	← cgdub left	21:28
	→ ponyofdeath joined	21:29
	McKraken_zzzzz → McKraken	21:29
ponyofdeath	hi, trying to figure out how I can change where my cloned master is pointing to? it seems to be pointing to a branch's ref and i want to change that to track what the remote origin master is.	21:29
	← texinwien_ left	21:32
	← jnavila left	21:32
_ikke_	ponyofdeath: How did you determine where it's pointing to?	21:32
ponyofdeath	did a git ref-list	21:34
	or just cat .git/config	21:34
_ikke_	Just trying to determine what you mean by pointing to	21:35
ponyofdeath	it seems that when it was cloned it's master was set up to be a branch	21:35
_ikke_	master is a branch	21:35
	→ le_melomane joined	21:35
_ikke_	Just a label pointing to a commit	21:35
	→ Phylock joined	21:35
_ikke_	ponyofdeath: what does git branch -vv show?	21:36
ponyofdeath	yes but not it a bit confusing for people wokring that commiting to master on that branch is actually not master on the remote	21:36
	* master d8ea8f0 [origin/feat/saltmole: ahead 1]	21:36
	← rwb left	21:36
	← rnsanchez left	21:36
_ikke_	right	21:36
ponyofdeath	and now trying to merge master back into that branch	21:36
_ikke_	git branch master --set-upstream-to origin/master	21:37
ponyofdeath	i dont know how to do :)	21:37
_ikke_	^^\	21:37
ponyofdeath	_ikke_: thanks!	21:38
	← crose left	21:39
	→ hagridaaron joined	21:39
	← Gsham left	21:40
	→ texinwien_ joined	21:40
	← le_melomane left	21:40
	→ v0z_ joined	21:40
	← hagridaaron left	21:41
	→ chardan joined	21:41
	← mwfires left	21:42
	→ Gsham joined	21:43
	← Budyn left	21:43
	→ Electrometro joined	21:46
	← Gsham left	21:48
	← texinwien_ left	21:48
	← seemikehack left	21:49
	→ texinwien_ joined	21:49
	← gugah left	21:49
	→ sieve joined	21:50
	← ych left	21:50
	→ livingstn joined	21:50
	→ AciD- joined	21:52
	→ tg joined	21:52
	← Flaghacker left	21:53
	← rmb left	21:53
	← texinwien_ left	21:54
	← jedahan left	21:54
	→ texinwien_ joined	21:56
	← cagomez left	21:56
	← livingstn left	21:57
	→ cagomez joined	21:57
	← sieve left	21:58
	→ jedahan joined	21:59
	→ sieve joined	21:59
	← sieve left	22:01
	← nickabbey left	22:01
	→ chipotle joined	22:02
	← kpease left	22:02
	← MattMaker left	22:03
	← texinwien_ left	22:04
	← durre left	22:04
	← scoobertron left	22:05
	→ scoobertron joined	22:05
	→ kevwil joined	22:06
	→ texinwien_ joined	22:07
	→ Shakeel_ joined	22:07
	→ shgysk8zer0_ joined	22:08
	← hhee left	22:09
	← Tobbi left	22:09
	→ sieve joined	22:10
	← elsevero left	22:11
	→ Masber joined	22:12
	→ elsevero joined	22:12
	← e14 left	22:12
	← YuGiOhJCJ left	22:13
	→ not-an-aardvark joined	22:14
	← sieve left	22:15
	gitinfo set mode: +v	22:15
	← elsevero left	22:17
	← Uesg left	22:17
	← m4sk1n left	22:17
	← aard_ left	22:18
	→ GodGinrai joined	22:18
	→ ISmithers joined	22:19
	← orbyt_ left	22:19
	→ ych joined	22:21
	← texinwien_ left	22:21
	← Sasazuka left	22:21
	→ Sasazuka joined	22:23
	→ texinwien_ joined	22:23
	← rgb-one left	22:23
	→ dave0x6d joined	22:23
	→ oleksiyp joined	22:25
	← Masber left	22:25
	→ DARSCODE joined	22:26
	← ash_workz left	22:27
	← madewokherd left	22:27
	← griffindy left	22:28
	← LeBlaaanc left	22:30
	← exitcode1 left	22:31
	← jedahan left	22:32
	← Es0teric left	22:32
	← dan2k3k4 left	22:32
	← v0z_ left	22:33
	→ tang^ joined	22:33
	← bcc left	22:33
	← Sasazuka left	22:34
	→ Sasazuka joined	22:34
	← ych left	22:35
	← bannakaffalatta left	22:35
	← Abbott left	22:35
	← DARSCODE left	22:36
	→ gugah joined	22:37
	← joeco left	22:37
	→ joeco joined	22:37
	← d^sh left	22:38
	→ d^sh joined	22:39
	→ dan2k3k4 joined	22:39
	← cdg left	22:40
	→ bcc joined	22:42
	← bcc left	22:42
	→ bcc joined	22:42
	→ jdl_ joined	22:44
	→ exitcode1 joined	22:44
cbreak	so, when's git switching to sha2 or sha3?	22:44
	→ anuxivm joined	22:45
	→ joshszep joined	22:45
cbreak	or are annotated signed tags left out to rot?	22:45
Eugene	!list	22:45
gitinfo	[!mailing_list] The mailing list can be reached via [email@hidden.address] You don't need to subscribe to the list, you will always be put in cc on reply. Read archives at http://public-inbox.org/git	22:45
Eugene	That is a great question for the mailign list ;-)	22:45
	→ rwb joined	22:45
jdl_	I'm glad I'm not on the malign list!	22:46
	→ pfrench joined	22:46
cbreak	well, I don't really use annotated signed tags	22:46
	→ durre joined	22:46
jdl_	There is still some work to do before a conversion to SHA256 can be done.	22:46
cbreak	jdl_: sounds like the git devs are slow :(	22:46
jdl_	It is in the works, but not fully baked yet.	22:47
	← Sasazuka left	22:47
cbreak	sha1 has been suspect for over 5 years	22:47
jdl_	I'm not telling them that.	22:47
	← jdl left	22:47
	→ Sasazuka joined	22:47
jdl_	Or, rather, if they are too slow, they could use your help?	22:47
cbreak	I doubt that	22:47
	I'm a C++ dev, I don't do C :)	22:48
jdl_	Version, um, 5 of the patch series was posted a day or two ago.	22:48
	jdl_ nods	22:48
	→ aidalgol joined	22:48
cbreak	but I'd expect the change to not be that big	22:48
	you'd only have to add a new hashing algorithm, change the repo format on disk and in transit	22:48
	and maybe add transition code	22:48
jdl_	The notion of OID == SHA1 is being fully abstracted out.	22:48
cbreak	the bigger problem would be that there'd be incompatible repositories	22:49
jdl_	You would likely have to commit to a conversion or so. Not sure what the expected path there is yet.	22:49
cbreak	maybe they make object IDs versioned	22:50
	git describe already uses a g prefix for git hashes	22:50
	maybe it'll be h for sha2 or 3 :)	22:50
jdl_	Dunno.	22:50
	→ nettoweb joined	22:50
	→ Sasazuka__ joined	22:50
cbreak	well, what ever, good to hear they're not deciding to give up on protecting repository integrity	22:51
jdl_	They are not.	22:51
	← Sasazuka left	22:52
	← chipotle left	22:53
	→ livingstn joined	22:53
	← jnewt left	22:53
	← hahuang65 left	22:54
	← oleksiyp left	22:55
	← pfrench left	22:55
	→ pfrench joined	22:55
	→ SwiftMatt joined	22:55
	← finalbeta left	22:56
	→ finalbeta joined	22:56
	← durre left	22:57
	← livingstn left	22:58
	→ orbyt_ joined	23:00
	→ livingstn joined	23:00
	← fmeerkoetter left	23:01
dragoonis	I'm looking to forcibly check out a target branch, but i'm being told I can't due to dirty working tree changes .. I'd like to ignore these and just blow away any dirty changes and take whatever is in the branch	23:01
	see my command here: https://gist.github.com/dragoonis/6c331414a26e984faa0ec6537728917f	23:01
	→ fmeerkoetter joined	23:01
	← tg left	23:01
	→ afuentes joined	23:02
dragoonis	will "git checkout -f " suffice?	23:02
	← metalraiden34 left	23:03
	→ venmx joined	23:03
	← ResidentBiscuit left	23:05
	← boubou left	23:06
	← dreiss left	23:07
	← Nerbrun left	23:08
	← AaronMT left	23:09
	→ tg joined	23:10
	← nettoweb left	23:10
	← gugah left	23:10
	→ nettoweb joined	23:11
	← whaley left	23:11
	← livingstn left	23:12
	← King_Hual left	23:12
	← Phylock left	23:14
	→ kevwil_ joined	23:16
	← Narwhaal left	23:16
	← cdown left	23:17
	← jimi_ left	23:17
	← kevwil left	23:17
	→ Narwhaal joined	23:17
	→ bannakaffalatta joined	23:18
	→ ToBeCloud joined	23:18
	gitinfo set mode: +v	23:18
	→ gugah joined	23:19
	← cagomez left	23:20
	→ cagomez joined	23:20
	→ tertu joined	23:22
	→ metalraiden34 joined	23:22
	gitinfo set mode: +v	23:23
tertu	quick question: i'm having some trouble seeing remote branches on my local copy of a repo that's on github	23:23
	← cagomez left	23:23
	→ cagomez joined	23:24
	← afuentes left	23:24
qqx	tertu: How are you trying to see them? `git branch`? If so use `git branch -r`.	23:25
	← scoobertron left	23:25
	→ scoobertron joined	23:26
tertu	i still only see master when i do that	23:27
	→ xissburg_ joined	23:27
	→ Krenair joined	23:28
	← m0viefreak left	23:28
	← jagob left	23:28
	← xissburg left	23:28
qqx	What does `git config --get-all remote.origin.fetch` show?	23:29
	← publio left	23:32
	→ dgonzo joined	23:32
tertu	+refs/heads/master:refs/remotes/origin/master	23:33
	← sentriz left	23:33
	← dersand left	23:33
	← Gustavo6046 left	23:34
	→ sentriz joined	23:36
	→ Gustavo6046 joined	23:36
	← kevwil_ left	23:36
	← gugah left	23:37
	← metalraiden34 left	23:37
qqx	Looks like you used --single-branch when cloning. In which case it's doing what you told it to do.	23:38
	→ thiago joined	23:38
qqx	You should be able to use `git remote set-branches '*'` to reconfigure it to get everything. Then `git fetch` to actually do that.	23:39
tertu	got it	23:39
	← mablae left	23:41
	← dmj` left	23:41
	← Sasazuka__ left	23:41
	← j7k6 left	23:41
	→ dmj` joined	23:41
	→ tekniq joined	23:41
	→ menip joined	23:43
tertu	thanks!	23:43
	← DarkPsydeLord left	23:44
	← matsaman left	23:45
	← cwre left	23:46
	→ cdg joined	23:48
	→ Kaisyu joined	23:48
	→ Munt joined	23:48
	→ Sasazuka joined	23:50
	→ cwre joined	23:51
	← jimsio left	23:52
	← cwre left	23:54
	→ cwre joined	23:54
Munt	Hey folks I've made a big mess of my online git repo. I have a backup of the local git repo before I tried to do a lot of merging and inappropriate commands. Is there a way to just replace the online repo with my local backup ? Would it be reasonable to delete the online repo and recreate it with the backed up local copy ? Maybe there's a better way	23:55
	→ chipotle joined	23:55
	← explody left	23:56
	→ explody joined	23:57
	← rizonz left	23:57
	→ madewokherd joined	23:58
	← chardan left	23:59

Logs Search ←Prev date Next date→

Channels Documentation