IRCloggy #git 2021-03-02

Logs Search ←Prev date Next date→ Channels Documentation

Provider of IRC logs since 2005.
WARNING: As Freenode became unjoinable and lost all warnings in topics, we cannot log channels on Freenode anymore.

2021-03-02

← jimmiehansson left00:01
← PJBoy left00:01
← opal left00:02
→ opal joined00:07
← calcul0n__ left00:08
← Narrat left00:08
→ jedsharp joined00:09
→ tofran joined00:12
→ arcatech joined00:13
→ domnx joined00:18
← arcatech left00:19
→ Benzi-Junior joined00:22
→ vdamewood joined00:24
← tiin57 left00:25
→ alesan joined00:26
→ max_ joined00:26
→ tiin57 joined00:29
→ sgn joined00:32
← max_ left00:32
← domnx left00:32
→ tedfernau joined00:35
← tedfernau left00:35
→ Muimi joined00:36
← treefrob left00:37
→ arcatech joined00:37
→ treefrob joined00:41
← arcatech left00:44
← cbreak left00:45
← nvmd left00:49
← royal_screwup21 left00:54
→ royal_screwup21 joined00:54
← tiin57 left00:55
← Gurkenglas left00:57
→ tiin57 joined00:58
← royal_screwup21 left00:59
→ arcatech joined01:00
← gast0n left01:00
← _Warl0ck left01:00
→ gast0n joined01:01
→ _Warl0ck joined01:01
→ supercoven_ joined01:02
← supercoven left01:04
← nickmass left01:04
← arcatech left01:05
← orbyt_v7 left01:07
← qpdb left01:10
→ qpdb joined01:10
→ Xenguy joined01:11
← CodeSlingerPaul left01:13
← luke-jr left01:13
← shailangsa left01:15
→ luke-jr joined01:17
→ arcatech joined01:19
← oriba left01:22
→ xpuctu4_ joined01:22
→ ericr joined01:23
← xpuctu4 left01:24
← tiin57 left01:25
→ royal_screwup21 joined01:27
→ shailangsa joined01:28
→ tiin57 joined01:29
← ericr left01:30
← honigkuchen left01:31
← radu242 left01:32
← royal_screwup21 left01:32
→ shush_ joined01:33
← n3wborn left01:33
birkoff if anyone recalls how to disable motd message from status upon connection to server please let me know (highlight me)01:38
← shush_ left01:38
birkoff oops sorry wrong channel01:38
can one modify a .patch file for an applied patch and reapply it getting the changes in it ?01:38
← gast0n left01:44
→ radu242 joined01:47
← luke-jr left01:50
← shush left01:54
→ shush joined01:55
← tiin57 left01:55
→ shush_ joined01:55
→ drbean_ joined01:58
→ tiin57 joined01:58
→ royal_screwup21 joined01:59
← shush left02:00
birkoff what is an easy way to derive a patch or create commits from a .patch file of someone else that changes multiple files and i just need to modify some of it02:02
← avu left02:03
← yn left02:04
← opal left02:04
← royal_screwup21 left02:05
← Cork left02:06
→ luke-jr joined02:06
← ssiyad left02:07
→ Cork joined02:09
→ ferdna joined02:09
← sgn left02:09
← grumble left02:10
← SwiftMatt left02:10
← arcatech left02:10
mackerman birkoff: Create tempoary branch, apply patch, edit files, generate your own diff02:13
→ grumble joined02:14
birkoff it would be easier if I could derive file changes from the .patch file02:14
→ nsc joined02:15
→ yn joined02:15
birkoff if for example I need to replace all # characters with $ characters only in the lines in the patch that use them02:15
← Guest49671 left02:15
→ avu joined02:16
birkoff oh I see diff against a clean patched branch02:16
→ opal joined02:18
← shush_ left02:22
→ thad_the_man joined02:23
→ ssiyad joined02:24
← tiin57 left02:25
→ Ratler joined02:29
→ tiin57 joined02:29
→ shush joined02:30
mackerman The edit files step could be a git add --patch session where you edit the hunks different between the work tree and the index02:31
← durham left02:32
← Nickeeh_ left02:34
← roflin left02:34
← shush left02:34
→ royal_screwup21 joined02:35
→ mowotter joined02:40
← Lord_of_Life left02:40
← royal_screwup21 left02:40
→ Lord_of_Life joined02:41
← mowotter left02:41
← k3yp left02:42
← mowcat left02:42
→ k3yp joined02:44
← vdamewood left02:47
→ mowcat joined02:52
→ Nickeeh joined02:53
← mowcat left02:54
← tiin57 left02:55
→ roflin joined02:56
→ shush joined02:58
→ tiin57 joined02:58
← guide left03:04
← bvdw left03:04
← Learath2 left03:04
← rosco_y left03:04
← Bucciarati left03:04
← avar left03:04
bukowa back to my question about gitignore you can actually perform an action on all gitignored files using `find . | git check-ignore --no-index --stdin | xargs -n1 -t echo +1`03:06
← gearnode left03:09
← wmey1 left03:12
← LinusCDE2 left03:12
← shush left03:12
→ morph joined03:13
→ wmey1 joined03:13
→ Learath2 joined03:13
← Tuor left03:14
→ Tuor joined03:14
→ LinusCDE2 joined03:15
→ Bucciarati joined03:16
→ avar joined03:16
← avar left03:16
→ avar joined03:16
→ FinnElija joined03:16
finn_elija → Guest5250103:16
FinnElija → finn_elija03:16
→ bvdw joined03:17
→ nopf joined03:17
← Guest52501 left03:20
← Gustavo6046 left03:21
← CryptoClub left03:21
→ shush joined03:21
← ndim left03:21
← bukowa left03:22
← shush left03:22
→ CryptoClub joined03:23
← tiin57 left03:25
→ tiin57 joined03:28
← mindCrime left03:29
← senux left03:31
→ senux_ joined03:31
← wolfshappen left03:34
← Blkt left03:34
→ wolfshappen joined03:44
→ Blkt joined03:44
← makro left03:44
→ WakiMiko joined03:45
→ nioncode joined03:45
→ i7c joined03:46
→ scorphus joined03:47
← Xiti left03:47
→ iateadonut joined03:48
iateadonut i started a repo on a staging server (which should be exactly the same as the live server). i've made a few changes.03:48
now i'm wondering what is the best way for me to create a live repo and push the changes to it? (normally, i would have already created the live repo before i started working on the staging repo)03:49
← silverwhitefish left03:52
← tiin57 left03:55
→ silverwhitefish joined03:55
→ tiin57 joined03:59
← AlpineLlama left04:00
→ AlpineLlama joined04:02
← DiffieHellman left04:02
← opal left04:03
← reen_ left04:03
← tryte left04:03
← denisse left04:03
← cisco87 left04:03
← PaulePanter left04:03
← finn_elija left04:03
← meropyri left04:03
← AnAverageHuman left04:03
← iNs left04:03
birkoff mackerman: editing the hunks wouldn't be enough if the interesting line is not included in the context right?04:04
← mika left04:04
← sybariten left04:04
← gioyik left04:04
← andreas303 left04:04
← milkt left04:04
← gpanders left04:04
← ghost43_ left04:04
← bamdad left04:04
← xelxebar left04:04
← Hello71 left04:04
← j7k6 left04:05
→ nyxyn joined04:06
← zebrag left04:14
→ PaulePanter joined04:15
← kupi left04:15
→ cisco87 joined04:16
→ tryte joined04:16
→ xelxebar joined04:16
→ gpanders joined04:16
→ meropyri joined04:16
→ reen joined04:16
→ denisse joined04:16
→ opal joined04:16
→ DiffieHellman joined04:16
→ milkt joined04:16
→ ghost43 joined04:16
→ bamdad joined04:16
→ iNs joined04:18
→ Hello71 joined04:18
→ AnAverageHuman joined04:20
← DiffieHellman left04:20
→ finn_elija joined04:20
→ gioyik joined04:21
→ andreas303 joined04:21
← drbean_ left04:22
→ DiffieHellman joined04:22
← Xenguy left04:23
← tiin57 left04:25
← milkt left04:25
→ sybariten joined04:25
→ milkt joined04:25
→ mika joined04:25
→ j7k6 joined04:27
→ tiin57 joined04:29
← foul_owl left04:30
→ crose joined04:33
→ royal_screwup21 joined04:37
← royal_screwup21 left04:41
← hussam left04:42
← nyxyn left04:44
→ foul_owl joined04:46
← scorphus left04:49
→ scorphus joined04:49
← ferdna left04:52
← haritz left04:54
→ haritz joined04:54
← haritz left04:54
→ haritz joined04:54
← tiin57 left04:55
← natechan left04:57
→ tiin57 joined04:59
→ mexen_office joined05:02
← howdoi left05:08
← thad_the_man left05:09
→ Xiti joined05:12
← weltall left05:12
→ natechan joined05:22
← tiin57 left05:25
← Dotz0cat left05:26
→ arcatech joined05:27
→ tiin57 joined05:28
← heyitsrama left05:29
← arcatech left05:31
→ makro joined05:38
→ Goplat joined05:39
→ ferdna joined05:40
→ Dotz0cat joined05:41
← AnAverageHuman left05:44
→ thad_the_man joined05:47
← Maxattax left05:50
← lacrymology left05:54
→ howdoi joined05:54
← tiin57 left05:55
← natechan left05:55
→ tiin57 joined05:59
→ durham joined06:09
← durham left06:10
→ durham joined06:11
← aquijoule_ left06:12
→ aquijoule_ joined06:12
→ riksteri joined06:13
→ envex joined06:14
← crose left06:19
← raven-au left06:19
→ crose joined06:20
← sudoforge left06:20
→ raven-au joined06:21
← durham left06:25
← tiin57 left06:25
→ jle joined06:27
→ tiin57 joined06:28
← ferdna left06:29
← madewokherd left06:30
→ rajfuzzy joined06:32
jle hi, I have a repo where work is done on the master branch and deployment is done by pushing everything to a deploy branch.. the command I was told to use is 'git push origin master:deploy'.. now I am in the situation that I need to "cancel" the last deployment and push an older state/commit to the deploy branch.. if I don't care about history of the deploy branch, can I safely do 'git push origin06:34
commitid:deploy'? if so, what does origin then refer to here?06:34
→ weltall joined06:35
→ dionysus69 joined06:36
← raven-au left06:37
→ dimi1947 joined06:37
→ royal_screwup21 joined06:38
← opal left06:38
→ raven-au joined06:39
ikke jle: origin is the remote name06:39
jle ikke: ah, makes sense then.. I saw some posts mentioning using 'origin' to find the name of the 'master/main/..' branch, so I was a bit confused.. so the git push origin commitid:deploybranch would be correct then?06:41
ikke yes06:41
jle: you might need to add --force if you push something that is not directly following what was there before06:42
← royal_screwup21 left06:43
jle yeah, let me try.. got 'Updates were rejected because a pushed branch tip is behind its remote'06:43
ikke right06:43
← moldorcoder7 left06:47
jle ikke: it worked, thanks!06:48
← Rhonda left06:49
→ moldorcoder7 joined06:50
→ Rhonda joined06:51
→ sord937 joined06:54
← tiin57 left06:55
→ tiin57 joined06:58
→ tsdh joined07:01
← featurive left07:02
→ featurive joined07:03
← milkt left07:06
← thiago left07:06
→ milkt joined07:06
← gioyik left07:08
→ zillolo joined07:13
→ john_johnk joined07:17
→ ndim joined07:22
← Betal left07:22
← tiin57 left07:25
→ cbreak joined07:26
→ tiin57 joined07:27
→ LetoThe2nd joined07:31
xpuctu4_ → xPucTu407:32
← Muimi left07:32
← milkt left07:32
→ milkt joined07:33
← CryptoClub left07:33
→ royal_screwup21 joined07:36
→ CryptoClub joined07:38
→ abrac joined07:39
← royal_screwup21 left07:40
← abrac left07:41
→ abrac joined07:42
← abrac left07:47
→ lacrymology joined07:50
→ abrac joined07:52
→ natechan joined07:53
→ rfuentess joined07:54
← srinidhi left07:54
← tiin57 left07:55
→ tiin57 joined07:58
→ Aquazi joined07:58
← rajfuzzy left07:59
→ Dxfinder joined07:59
← Dxfinder left08:01
← unluckyshrubbery left08:02
→ Haohmaru joined08:05
→ Muimi joined08:09
→ nick1292 joined08:10
← nick1292 left08:10
→ FFY00 joined08:13
← FFY00_ left08:15
→ oxymoron93 joined08:16
← dudebbn_ left08:20
→ miczac_ joined08:21
← tiin57 left08:25
← natechan left08:25
→ tiin57 joined08:28
← random_yanek left08:29
← mat001 left08:32
→ noidea joined08:35
→ gearnode joined08:37
→ random_yanek joined08:40
→ hamburgler joined08:40
← hamburgler left08:41
→ opal joined08:43
→ dudebbn_ joined08:43
→ chele joined08:46
→ n3wborn joined08:47
← raven-au left08:49
→ Guest97 joined08:49
→ raven-au joined08:50
← LouWestin left08:51
→ LouWestin joined08:51
← Guest97 left08:53
→ Guest97 joined08:53
← tiin57 left08:55
→ tiin57 joined08:58
← Goplat left08:59
gitinfo set mode: +v09:00
← raven-au left09:01
→ hamburgler joined09:01
Guest97 hi there, my system broke and I pushed changes from read only mounted partition and pushed09:01
anyway I have that remote commit now09:01
and I pushed the real changes when I fixed the system09:02
← hamburgler left09:02
Guest97 now I have that commit hanging before my last commit in remote and local09:02
→ raven-au joined09:02
Guest97 I want to remove that commit only, and to continue from third in reverse to the last09:02
is there a way to do so09:02
I just want to remove the last remote which is second locally (to remove it as well) and properly push the last local09:03
the data I pushed has missing and 0 byte files09:04
← FFY00 left09:04
Guest97 I want to get rid of it not to merge from it if anyway possible09:05
→ mobidrop joined09:07
→ Timvde joined09:08
→ wrobinso1 joined09:11
→ catt joined09:12
osse Guest97: I don't follow 100% but if you know that what you have locally now is correct you can push --force09:12
→ bolovanos_ joined09:12
← john_johnk left09:13
← wrobinson left09:13
Guest97 the last commit is the one I want to keep, the one before is broken one09:14
the broken one (one before last) is already pushed09:14
but neither are pulled on my machine09:14
→ john_johnk joined09:15
Guest97 I want to push the changes of the last local (working commit) over the previous broken (remote)09:15
→ PJBoy joined09:15
Guest97 A(broken-pushed-not pulled) -> B(working-local-not pushed)09:16
I want to get rid of A and push B instead of it09:16
osse09:16
← jesseTree left09:17
osse !situation09:17
gitinfo Please post the url returned by `git log -n 20 --all --graph --format="%h %p %d %s" | curl -F text=@- https://upaste.de/` to give us an idea about what your situation is (increase the -n argument if your problem is more complex than 20 commits can explain)09:17
← powerhouse left09:17
→ jla joined09:17
Guest97 https://upaste.de/Dbw09:20
so bugfix is the critical one09:20
bugfix v2 is the one I want in it's place09:20
← tiin57 left09:25
Guest97 osse should I force push09:28
→ tiin57 joined09:29
osse Guest97: git rebase -i origin/developer; delete the line corresponding to "bugfix". save and close. push09:30
Guest97 i'm a bit scared to remove it, can I check if that commit compiles first09:33
osse compile the one you want to remove?09:34
Guest97 yes, it pushed files that are not in the last one09:35
→ royal_screwup21 joined09:37
osse git checkout 09e1b1a09:37
then do whatever you want09:37
→ calcul0n__ joined09:37
← andy25225_ left09:37
osse do you actually want to keep the changes madfe in that commit but remove it from the history? in other words, *combine* the two commits into one?09:38
← howdoi left09:38
Guest97 I would be fine with keeping what I have locally09:39
→ jimmiehansson joined09:40
→ srinidhi joined09:40
Guest97 i just get the message failed to push some refs to <git-repo-link>09:41
← royal_screwup21 left09:42
Guest97 updates were rejected because the remote contains work that you do not have locally. This is usually caused by another repository pushuing to the same red. You may want to first integrate the remote changes (e.g., git pull ...) before pushing again. See the Note about fast-forwawrds' in 'git push --help' for details09:42
osse09:42
to the same ref*09:43
osse that's something else entirely09:43
git fetch and show the updated history09:44
← hnOsmium0001 left09:44
← gigasu_shida left09:44
→ royal_screwup21 joined09:44
Guest97 I shouldn't lose my last local commit by running fetch? osse09:45
osse no09:45
fetch only updates stuff that says "origin/whatever"09:46
→ unluckyshrubbery joined09:46
Guest97 https://upaste.de/agX09:46
← alesan left09:47
Guest97 locally it still compiles well with the latest changes09:48
should I push or09:48
osse I can't tell09:48
I *think* you want push --force09:49
→ andy25225_ joined09:49
Guest97 push force should send what I have locally to remote? osse09:52
that's what I want, just to keep what I have locally as the last remote commit09:52
it's all commited in the last commit and head points to it in the graph09:52
→ otisolsen70 joined09:52
← tiin57 left09:55
→ tiin57 joined09:58
osse Guest97: then that is what you want10:02
Guest97 osse thanks man. I have force pushed. Now I tried to pull and got https://upaste.de/mpf10:03
osse seems straightforward10:04
← abrac left10:05
Guest97 not sure which strategy to pick not to lose data10:06
osse you will not lose data either way10:06
the pull succeeded. this is just a helpful message10:06
← mexen_office left10:08
→ calcul0n_ joined10:09
← Voxel left10:09
→ Voxel joined10:11
→ ADG1089__ joined10:12
Guest97 osse thank you soooo much :D it worked!10:12
← calcul0n__ left10:12
← ADG1089__ left10:13
→ ADG1089__ joined10:14
← mniip left10:15
ADG1089__ I have 3 branches - dev, qa and main which are all protected, I wanted to pick few commits fromd dev and merge to qa, should creating a branch from dev with cherry-picking those commits and merging to qa using pr solve this?10:15
→ amahl joined10:18
→ Gurkenglas joined10:18
Habbie ADG1089__, if you want to add a few things to qa, branch from qa10:20
→ mozgalom joined10:21
→ mniip joined10:22
ADG1089__ Habbie: ok branch from qa and add those commits using cherry pick and then raise a pr to qa, right?10:22
Habbie yes10:22
→ natechan joined10:23
← tiin57 left10:25
← ADG1089__ left10:25
← jla left10:27
→ tiin57 joined10:29
← royal_screwup21 left10:47
← mozgalom left10:54
← tiin57 left10:55
← natechan left10:56
→ jla joined10:56
← elemongw left10:58
→ tiin57 joined10:58
← Guest97 left11:01
← xelxebar left11:01
→ rosco_y joined11:01
→ xelxebar joined11:01
→ shabius_ joined11:12
← shabius left11:16
→ royal_screwup21 joined11:16
← tiin57 left11:25
→ tiin57 joined11:29
→ dpl joined11:30
→ onizu joined11:36
← ph0b0s left11:51
→ ph0b0s joined11:52
← tiin57 left11:55
← royal_screwup21 left11:55
← cd left11:55
→ royal_screwup21 joined11:55
← duderonomy left11:56
← ph0b0s left11:56
→ tiin57 joined11:58
← royal_screwup21 left12:00
→ cdown_ joined12:07
cdown_ → cdown12:09
→ max_ joined12:10
→ selckin joined12:13
→ sgn joined12:15
→ royal_screwup21 joined12:16
← max_ left12:20
← sgn left12:21
← dpl left12:24
← tiin57 left12:25
→ NeoCron joined12:25
→ sgn joined12:26
→ klonn joined12:26
→ abrac joined12:27
→ tiin57 joined12:28
→ ph0b0s joined12:31
← theorangeone left12:32
→ theorangeone joined12:33
→ dpl joined12:36
← theorangeone left12:36
→ theorangeone joined12:37
← hexa- left12:39
→ T_UNIX joined12:42
→ hexa- joined12:42
← klonn left12:46
← R2robot left12:47
waterkip is there an easy way to prepend some data to a commit message during a rebase?12:49
meaning, i have a series of commits that need an issue number in front of it12:50
→ natechan joined12:53
osse waterkip: you mean in an automatic, scriptable way?12:53
waterkip yeah12:53
osse what is the source of the numbers?12:54
waterkip let's assume from the user12:54
osse yeah but how?12:54
← tiin57 left12:55
osse I can think of two ways: 1) override GIT_EDITOR to a script and use "reword" during rebase -i 2) add a separate exec line to rebase -i that scripts around git commit --amend some other way12:56
waterkip I was thinking 212:56
rn I have the following logic, `git log --format='%s' -n1`, prepend the text, than get the body (or raw body) and feed that to commit --amend with -m12:58
→ tiin57 joined12:58
→ irrgit joined12:58
osse git commit --amend --file - can probably help12:59
waterkip mm, smart12:59
osse git log --format='%B' -n 1 | sed '1s/^/omg:/' | git commit --amend --file -13:00
waterkip sweet13:00
osse now how to replace the "omg:" with something from the user13:01
→ R2robot joined13:02
waterkip `git log --format='%B' -n 1 | sed "1s/^/$prepend:/" | git commit --amend --file -`13:02
osse sure, if it's the same for all issues13:03
→ zebrag joined13:03
waterkip it is the same, it is on a feature branch13:03
osse hmm, i think perhaps GIT_EDITOR=... would be simpler13:06
then it would only be a matter of marking the reword13:06
hmm, on the other hand rebase -x makes the exec thing easy13:06
waterkip i now have it as a script that can be used on the cli or via rebase13:07
i'll have a look at the git-editor solution later13:07
for now the problem is solved :)13:07
thnx!13:07
← jaziz left13:09
→ Rashad joined13:11
Rashad Hello.13:11
← jle left13:11
Rashad For some reason, Git is ignoring a folder called extlib/ which has two .jar files even though I have not ignored them in .gitignore13:11
bremner did you try "git status --ignored" ?13:12
osse Rashad: git check-ignore -v path/to/some.jar13:12
bremner or that13:12
→ bolovanos__ joined13:12
← dka left13:13
Rashad oh my13:15
I had an empty line in my .gitignore13:15
these only don't count if they are at the end of the file?13:15
osse blank lines in .gitignore is allowed13:16
← abrac left13:16
Rashad hmm13:16
← bolovanos_ left13:16
Rashad OK I should say that I have still not done any `git add`13:17
I am editting my .gitignore then running `git add . -n`13:18
and it doesn't show there.13:18
ok found it13:19
we have some files like "file.java02032021" which we want to ignore (and ultimately remove also), so I have a pattern to ignore *.*[0-9]*13:20
However the jar file is named: Client/extlib/jcommon-1.0.16.jar13:21
so it caught that too.13:21
so I think I have to do *.*java*[0-9]* now13:21
← n000g left13:21
Rashad btw git check-ignore -v path/to/some.jar is what helped me figure it out13:21
so thanks bremner, osse13:22
waterkip the extension is .java123456 ?13:22
i would probaly use java[0-9]+$ for the regexp13:23
Rashad yes because we don't use any kind of version control, so what we do when we change a file is put today's date on the last version we're replacing right now13:23
so I want to change file.java, I rename it to file.java03022021 and then copy my new file13:24
→ n000g joined13:24
→ honigkuchen joined13:24
→ abrac joined13:24
Rashad but now we'll be using git \o/13:24
← tiin57 left13:25
honigkuchen when I want a github with more community, should I then switch to gitlab? Is Gitlab much more about community?13:25
bremner not really.13:25
they have a different business model, but both are for profit US corporations13:25
honigkuchen when github is huge, gitlab has a lot more features13:26
← natechan left13:26
bremner use gitlab if you want.13:26
waterkip gitlab is FOSS13:27
github aint13:27
bremner gitlab makes it easier for community projects to self host13:27
gitlab is sortof FOSS13:27
waterkip sortoff?13:27
bremner yeah, there's Gitlab enterprise13:27
waterkip i don't think debian uses sortoff fossy products for salsa ;)13:27
bremner well, /whois bremner13:28
mackerman Both #gitlab and ##github have their own channels that can better explain their products13:28
osse I like gitlab. they seem like cool cats13:28
they even have their employment handbook online13:28
bremner "open core", that's the current jargon13:28
→ tiin57 joined13:29
← sweatsuit left13:29
→ mat001 joined13:30
← Muimi left13:33
→ Muimi joined13:34
← n000g left13:35
→ sweatsuit joined13:35
→ n000g joined13:38
← nioncode left13:39
← i7c left13:39
← zebrag left13:40
→ zebrag joined13:40
→ nioncode joined13:42
→ i7c joined13:42
← antranigv left13:46
→ SerialSmile joined13:47
→ iNs_ joined13:48
← alip left13:48
← iNs left13:49
← sgn left13:49
→ alip joined13:49
→ antranigv joined13:49
→ mbooth joined13:50
← mbooth left13:51
← kprabhuv left13:52
← catt left13:52
→ FFY00 joined13:52
← CryptoClub left13:53
→ otalpster joined13:53
← tiin57 left13:55
→ CryptoClub joined13:56
→ tiin57 joined13:58
→ sudoforge joined14:02
← sudoforge left14:02
→ catt joined14:06
→ jimklimov2 joined14:07
← jimklimov1 left14:07
← catt left14:08
→ catt joined14:09
← abrac left14:09
→ abrac joined14:10
→ sgn joined14:10
→ madewokherd joined14:11
← ssiyad left14:12
← abrac left14:12
← mmattice left14:16
→ mmattice joined14:19
→ powerhouse joined14:21
→ nvmd joined14:21
← thansen left14:22
→ thansen joined14:23
← iateadonut left14:23
Rashad Hello again o/. The code I am going to commit was not authored by me. I want to be the committer, but not the author. I am trying to figure out if here: https://git-scm.com/docs/git-commit there is an option in the command where I can specify both14:24
Is the only way to do it is to set up author.name and committer.name in the config?14:25
← tiin57 left14:25
Rashad Oh hold on... if I do: --author=<author> , the committer will still be me (i.e., user.name)?14:26
→ Maxattax joined14:27
→ AnAverageHuman joined14:27
geirha yes14:28
Rashad Well in this case the author is not one person but our whole team14:28
So I want to put "Core Team" but it seems that it requires an email...14:28
→ tiin57 joined14:28
Rashad Can I not provide an email?14:29
→ masterplain joined14:29
← masterplain left14:30
→ masterplain joined14:30
Rashad OK found answer here: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/11579311/git-commit-as-different-user-without-email-or-only-email14:31
← long4mud left14:35
← zebrag left14:40
→ zebrag joined14:40
← irrgit left14:41
← T_UNIX left14:45
← mmattice left14:46
→ irrgit joined14:46
→ CodeSlingerPaul joined14:48
→ Gustavo6046 joined14:49
→ _noblegas joined14:53
← tiin57 left14:55
→ thiago joined14:56
← SerialSmile left14:57
→ tiin57 joined14:58
← dudebbn_ left15:03
→ mmattice joined15:06
→ linuxguru joined15:08
← mmattice left15:12
← oxymoron93 left15:13
← Benzi-Junior left15:15
← crose left15:16
→ sgn1 joined15:18
← sgn left15:19
→ sgn joined15:21
← xelxebar left15:22
→ xelxebar joined15:22
→ natechan joined15:23
→ arcatech joined15:23
← zillolo left15:24
← gearnode left15:24
→ Guest97 joined15:24
→ Newami joined15:25
→ zillolo joined15:25
← tiin57 left15:25
← Guest97 left15:25
→ mmattice joined15:29
→ tiin57 joined15:29
→ darkbit joined15:29
→ Pickchea joined15:31
← sgn1 left15:31
← masterplain left15:32
→ zamba joined15:33
← jimklimov2 left15:35
→ jimklimov1 joined15:37
→ alex14 joined15:37
← alex14 left15:38
→ zking1234 joined15:38
← oskie_ left15:38
← zking1234 left15:39
← arcatech left15:40
← zebrag left15:40
→ zebrag joined15:40
← jla left15:41
→ dudebbn_ joined15:41
← mmattice left15:42
← darkbit left15:46
← Newami left15:47
→ darkbit joined15:47
→ mmattice joined15:49
← dimi1947 left15:52
Furai Ok, this is driving me nuts error about 'Encountered X file(s) that should have been pointers, but weren't:' can't check out to another branch, can't do anything. What's the proper fix to this? What should I commit? Anyone knows top of their head? Searching the net gives me weird hacks as solutions.15:52
noidea Furai using git-lfs?15:53
Furai Yeah.15:54
← dionysus69 left15:54
Furai INB4: this is not the support channel for git extensions... :(15:55
← tiin57 left15:55
noidea What I think happened: You had some files tracked in git, you've added their extension to git-lfs, and somehow you now have some files in the repository that are not git-lfs entries but regularly tracked files.15:55
← natechan left15:56
← mmattice left15:56
noidea just try to save them locally in a temporary folder, delete them from git, commit their deletion, recommit them back and they will be properly tracked by git-lfs15:56
this is a dummy solution, but I don't have a better one :D15:57
Furai Hmm, I wasn't working on this repo so it's hard to say what happened. Maybe git lfs was introduced when the repo was already going for a while.15:58
noidea or if you don't have anything to lose in your current local copy: git clean -d -f -x || git reset --hard || git pull origin ?15:58
Furai Apparently someone fixed it on another branch but I can't checkout.15:58
→ tiin57 joined15:59
→ Betal joined16:00
Furai The problem is that stashing/restoring/reseting/cleaning doesn't want to work. It always keeps the modified files so it complains about overwriting it.16:02
senux_ → senux16:03
→ arcatech joined16:10
← zebrag left16:10
→ zebrag joined16:11
→ mmattice joined16:15
→ jla joined16:16
← sgn left16:23
← tiin57 left16:25
→ fish3485 joined16:25
← catt left16:26
→ durham joined16:27
→ tiin57 joined16:28
noidea Furai do you have local commits?16:29
Furai No, nothing I want to keep.16:29
I've even destroyed whole working directory, reindexed it, nothing really wants to work. It either complains that it has changes that will be overwritten or complains about objects that should have been pointers.16:31
← jimklimov1 left16:31
→ Numline1 joined16:31
noidea so a fresh checkout complains about changes that will be overwritten? o_O16:31
Numline1 Hey folks. I have this one question that's rather related to Github than general git, but I've noticed that Github is doing a weird diff calculation when reviewing PRs. I've read there's something called two dot diff and three dot diff. The issue is that open PRs always show a diff with the target branch as it was at that point in time, even if the16:32
target branch is updated several times before the PR gets merged. Does anyone know whether it's possible to change this behavior? Thanks! :)16:32
→ vicfred joined16:33
Numline1 PR = pull request, or merge request, depending on what tool you use :)16:33
← karx left16:34
→ karx joined16:34
→ maxwilliamson joined16:35
ikke Numline1: to update that, you need to rebase the branch16:36
Numline1: The idea is that you review the changes that the MR is bringing in, seeing changes from the target branch could be confusing16:36
Numline1 ikke: indeed, it's just little problematic if there's PRs that reference each others (or rather branches). So if we have branch "A" and branch "B" and branch "C", each having their own PR, it sometimes happens that we need to have stuff from branch "A" merged into branch "B"16:37
← arcatech left16:37
ikke then you need to rebase branch B ontop of branch A (perhaps after it's merged)16:38
Numline1 Which honestly is problematic by itself, but the turnaround on code reviews can be slow, so it's sometimes really needed. What happens in that case is that branch "B" shows changes from branch "A" even after branch "A" was emrged16:38
*merged16:38
yup, rebasing might work, havent tried that (I generally don't like to rebase, because I'm always confused on how it works, so I usually rather merge the target branch in, which I assume won't work in this case)16:38
← karx left16:39
Numline1 idk how either affect the history differently16:39
imMute Numline1: do you understand cherry-pick ?16:39
ikke merging generates more confusing history16:39
→ karx joined16:39
ikke (merging criss-cross, not merging in general)16:39
Numline1 imMute: partially I think. I'm more of a GUI (Forklift) user, but afaik it's basically just picking which commit makes it in and which doesn't16:40
← fish3485 left16:40
Numline1 ikke: is that also true when there's a squashed commit?16:40
← zebrag left16:40
Numline1 I might be mixing apples and bananas here, not sure16:40
imMute Numline1: cherry-pick is more like "I really want the change made by commit X on that other branch over there to be added to my branch here"16:40
ikke Numline1: squashing is more like rebasing than like merging16:40
→ zebrag joined16:40
Numline1 imMute: oh I see. But I suppose it'd mess up the Github diff the same way as merging the entire branch does (or rebasing at that point, same thing)16:41
ikke: gotcha :)16:41
imMute Numline1: cherry-picks are separate from the PR process16:41
Numline1 Either way, thank you guys for the tips. Shame there's no switch available in Github (I've seen some issues related to that), but I suppose it's a feature rather than a bug16:41
imMute: indeed, but I think the cherry picked code would still display as a part of the diff in Githubs' PR16:42
→ jimklimov1 joined16:42
Numline1 imMute: eg in the example above, if I cherry picked some stuff from branch "A" into branch "B", it'd still show up as diff in Github after branch "A" was merged16:42
imMute Numline1: right, if you cherry-pick on a branch that's part of a PR, those changes will show up just like all the other changes on the branch.16:42
Numline1 Indeed. I suppose that's where the two dot diff and three dot diff part comes in :)16:43
Sadly, I don't think Github lets you choose which one to show when dealing with PRs. You can directly change that when comparing two branches though16:43
ikke Or compare locally16:43
but I'm not sure how that helps16:44
Numline1 Yup, but that's an extra step especially since PRs are a proprietary thing (especially code review)16:44
Honestly, the only reason I thought about asking is that I feel like it worked differently. We had this situation at work today:16:45
I opened a PR on branch "A" yesterday which had a bug. There was branch "B" which had changes from branch "A" merged already. Branch "A" was merged into master in the meantime yet the PR for branch "B" was still showing a bug that's been fixed in the meantime16:45
confusing stuff :)16:45
← Pickchea left16:47
ikke It would look like your MR removed stuff that was added in the target branch16:51
and visa-versa16:51
You want to see a rebased diff without doing the rebase16:52
→ heyitsrama joined16:52
→ arcatech joined16:53
imMute which might not even be possible to do automatically - if one of the commits in the rebase had a conflict for example16:53
→ omega_doom joined16:55
← tiin57 left16:55
← heyitsrama left16:55
→ heyitsrama joined16:55
omega_doom hello. Why do i have sometimes rebase conflicts on not modified by me files?16:56
imMute if you didn't edit a file in the branch being rebased, I'm pretty sure it's impossible to get conflicts on that file...16:56
maybe the rebase is pulling in more commits than you think it is - you could do an interactive rebase to see the list of commits that will be rebased.16:57
→ tiin57 joined16:58
→ natechan joined16:59
← arcatech left17:00
← jla left17:00
→ gearnode joined17:02
omega_doom Also it shows automerge on some files that i didn't change.17:02
→ hnOsmium0001 joined17:04
→ masterplain joined17:05
← masterplain left17:05
→ masterplain joined17:05
← natechan left17:05
→ alesan joined17:07
← honigkuchen left17:08
← Haohmaru left17:08
→ arcatech joined17:09
← chele left17:09
→ Xiti` joined17:10
← miczac_ left17:12
← Xiti left17:13
→ miczac joined17:14
→ hussam joined17:15
→ jla joined17:15
→ Doraemon joined17:15
→ kprabhuv joined17:16
← NeoCron left17:16
→ clime joined17:21
→ orbitex joined17:22
→ Borkr joined17:22
← jla left17:23
← tiin57 left17:25
→ fish3485 joined17:25
→ natechan joined17:28
→ tiin57 joined17:28
omega_doom Is it possble to have rebase conflicts if a rebase has happend before? If so when how to solve it?17:30
i mean rebase conflicts on files that i didn't change.17:31
→ orbyt_v7 joined17:31
omega_doom crap. has connflicts on files that i hasn't changed again. anoying. How can i figure out what is wrong?17:34
imMute omega_doom: did you see my comment about using interactive rebase to see exactly which commits are being rebased?17:35
and usually the first time you rebase and get conflicts, you fix those conflicts and you shouldn't get them on a subsequent rebase (unless the base branch changed in the same spots again).17:36
← moldorcoder7 left17:36
→ mexen_office joined17:39
omega_doom imMute: ok, doing interactive rebase. The thing is there are specific files that give me conflicts quite often, very strange.17:39
← mexen_office left17:39
→ mexen_office joined17:40
← mexen_office left17:40
← zebrag left17:40
→ zebrag joined17:40
→ mexen_office joined17:40
← mexen_office left17:41
→ mexen_office joined17:41
← mexen_office left17:42
imMute those files changed on both branches then.17:42
omega_doom imMute: something stange is going on. Interactive rebase shows one commit this way - "# pick 7874512b29e540a6abd69154a7fb20...". It is cherry-pick and it changes files that give me conflict. What does it mean?17:45
imMute it means that one commit is the only commit on your branch that is being rebased.17:45
you can do "git show 7874512b29e" to see what the original commit did17:45
← rfuentess left17:45
→ moldorcoder7 joined17:47
← clime left17:47
← Vanotek left17:47
← tkazi left17:48
← dhollinger left17:48
omega_doom yes, i see it. It is cherry-pick and changed files that i never modified. How is it possble to have a commit that doesn't exist on branch that was used for branch off?17:50
imMute the commit exists. you ahve the SHA of it right there.17:52
omega_doom imMute: What doi you mean by "one commit is the only commit on your branch that is being rebased"?17:52
← zillolo left17:52
imMute you have a branch with a single commit on it.17:52
→ tkazi joined17:53
← fish3485 left17:53
imMute the base branch might have more commits. but that one commit is only on your branch (not any of the others)17:53
perrier-jouet is it possible to add content of symlink ?17:53
imMute perrier-jouet: git can track symlinks, yes.17:54
git can't track the contents of the symlink target though, if that's what you're asking.17:54
← tiin57 left17:55
→ heywood joined17:55
omega_doom imMute: Do you mean "# pick 7874512.." is already in my branch?17:55
imMute the commit 7874512.. is the one on your branch (prior to the rebase)17:56
← ELFrederich left17:56
→ shush joined17:56
← shush left17:57
→ codebam_ joined17:57
→ shush joined17:57
omega_doom imMute: But is it not mine.17:57
→ Tarutaev joined17:57
imMute whose is it then?17:58
git show 7874512 --format=fuller | head -517:58
omega_doom My commits are shown as normal "pick 1957c7c6.. blablabla".17:58
→ tiin57 joined17:59
omega_doom I don't have strange # infront of my commits.17:59
← heywood left18:00
imMute the # is a comment. lines that start with # are ignored by the rebase18:00
→ trewq joined18:01
omega_doom imMute: I don't understand. Why does intearctive rebase show commented commits in its list? I have never seen anything like that before.18:02
imMute I don't know why it would comment out the commit like that. are you sure you didn't accidentally type #?18:03
trewq I already have a repo that I am using and I would like to provide read and write access to a couple of folders that I am bringing on. I want to retrict what this user sees. Is this doable? I am reading this link https://git-scm.com/book/en/v2/Customizing-Git-An-Example-Git-Enforced-Policy18:03
imMute or maybe it's part of the editor?18:03
trewq: it's not possible to restrict users to a subset of the repo.18:03
← gearnode left18:03
→ clime joined18:04
imMute trewq: for reads anyway. server side hooks can implement permissions for writes/changes though.18:04
→ howdoi joined18:04
→ fax joined18:04
trewq imMute: thank you - I was suspecting that and wanted to confirm18:04
hmm.. the other option seems to be to create a new repo then18:05
I do not want to deal with submodules18:05
omega_doom imMute: No, i didn't touch anything. And conflicts are on files of that commented out commit.18:05
imMute trewq: subtrees might be useful for creating that other repo.18:05
trewq: 'git subtree split ...' specifically18:05
← CryptoClub left18:06
trewq imMute: cool - I did not know this. will check it out18:06
thanks!!18:06
imMute omega_doom: based on https://stackoverflow.com/questions/33297719/git-de-selects-a-commit-be-default-in-interactive-rebase maybe that commented out line means git noticed that commit exists on the target branch already, so it doesn't need to be brought in the rebase.18:07
← codebam_ left18:08
→ CryptoClub joined18:08
omega_doom imMute: Very strange. I have conflicts on files of that exact commented out commit.18:10
imMute are there no other not-commented lines in the interactive rebase script?18:10
← shush left18:11
omega_doom imMute: Yes, plenty not-commented out ones.18:11
imMute oh, I misunderstood you earlier. I thought that commented out line was the only line in the script. so there *are* other commits on your branch.18:12
that commented out line cannot possibly cause conflicts (since it doesn't do anything when the rebase runs). the conflicts must be coming from a different commit.18:12
when the rebase pauses to let you handle a conflict, it tells you the SHA of the original commit.18:12
bremner commenting out a commit can cause conflicts afaik18:13
just like ammending a commit in the middle of a sequence can cause conflicts18:14
← moldorcoder7 left18:14
bremner disclaimer: I didn't really read the backlog carefully18:14
→ gioyik joined18:15
imMute bremner: true. in this case, the commented out commit is from git doing it because git knows the commit is already applied to the target branch.18:15
bremner ah. never seen that.18:15
omega_doom Can be the problem that this commit is cherry-pick? git show shows only a hash of the cherry-picked commit.18:17
→ shush joined18:17
imMute omega_doom: I'm at the point where I have no idea what is going on in your repo. I'm not good enough to know how to fix it without inspecting the repo myself, unfortunately.18:18
bremner: I've never seen it either. and I just tried recreating it and couldn't easily18:18
← shush left18:19
→ shush joined18:20
← hussam left18:21
← jimmiehansson left18:21
omega_doom And the commit was cherry-picked twice at exact time. Ah.18:23
→ olx69 joined18:24
← shush left18:25
← tiin57 left18:25
→ shush joined18:25
→ vdamewood joined18:26
→ gioyik_ joined18:28
→ tiin57 joined18:28
← gioyik left18:29
→ gearnode joined18:30
→ clime1 joined18:32
→ moldorcoder7 joined18:32
→ henri joined18:32
← clime left18:34
← orbyt_v7 left18:35
← LetoThe2nd left18:37
← moldorcoder7 left18:39
← DevAntoine left18:39
omega_doom I think i see two commits because one is in my branch and the other is in master. How is it possilble for my branch already have this commit?18:42
→ moldorcoder7 joined18:43
← cdown left18:44
imMute sounds like it got cherry-picked from master into your branch.18:44
→ orbyt_v7 joined18:45
omega_doom I am very confused.18:46
I am not an author of cherry-picks.18:47
imMute are you using something like gitk or 'git log --graph --oneline' so you can see which branches commits are a part of ?18:48
osse !situation18:48
gitinfo Please post the url returned by `git log -n 20 --all --graph --format="%h %p %d %s" | curl -F text=@- https://upaste.de/` to give us an idea about what your situation is (increase the -n argument if your problem is more complex than 20 commits can explain)18:48
omega_doom imMute. Great, thanks. It is very helpfull.18:51
← rkta left18:52
→ rkta joined18:52
→ Noldorin joined18:52
← gearnode left18:53
→ Pickchea joined18:54
← ghoti left18:54
← tiin57 left18:55
→ abrac joined18:55
andy25225_ → andy2522518:56
← fflam left18:58
← clime1 left18:58
→ tiin57 joined18:58
→ clime joined18:59
→ dpl_ joined19:00
← dpl left19:02
→ fflam joined19:03
→ pac1 joined19:04
→ pac1_ joined19:04
trewq I would like to deploy some code on a linux server when I do a push to a repo. When I lookup github webhook deploy I am not getting reliable info. Do you have a recommendation on when I can look for more info?19:04
rewt !deploy19:05
gitinfo 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.html19:05
→ yrzr9550825 joined19:05
← yrzr955082 left19:07
yrzr9550825 → yrzr95508219:07
trewq thanks - I imagine there needs to a server running on the deployment machine that can receive the hook - and then initiate the deplyment?19:08
→ bolovanos_ joined19:12
← andy25225 left19:14
→ andy25225 joined19:14
← rkta left19:15
→ duderonomy joined19:15
→ rkta joined19:15
osse trewq: the receiver of the push runs a script/executable. that script/executable can do whatever you want19:16
such as connection to another server, or copy files to /var/www or whatever19:16
← bolovanos__ left19:16
trewq osse: yes, I was referring to the receiver. What is a good reciever?19:17
I was thinking of caddy19:17
I see people are using php19:17
osse trewq: i think you're misunderstanding. the server hosting the repo does this19:17
git itself invokes a script or your choosng19:17
ah, github complicates things. sorry19:18
trewq hmm.. yes, the server hosting the repo needs to be able to detect the webhook and do a pull19:18
← omega_doom left19:18
trewq Not sure what I am missing19:19
→ DevAntoine joined19:20
osse i think i just confused you with my nonsense19:20
i thought you hosted a plain repo yourself19:20
← arcatech left19:22
← warthog9 left19:22
→ ssiyad joined19:24
← Noldorin left19:24
← Aquazi left19:25
← tiin57 left19:25
← DevAntoine left19:26
trewq I have a repo - what do you mean by hosting a plain repo?19:27
osse By that I mean the server you pushed to was your own19:28
→ long4mud joined19:28
→ tiin57 joined19:29
← Xiti` left19:29
→ otisolsen70_ joined19:30
← otisolsen70_ left19:31
→ DevAntoine joined19:31
← otisolsen70 left19:34
→ Xiti joined19:38
← clime left19:40
← dudebbn_ left19:40
← otalpster left19:43
→ shak joined19:47
← miczac left19:49
→ mowcat joined19:50
→ arcatech joined19:50
→ kashike joined19:50
← powerhouse left19:51
← shak left19:53
→ clime joined19:54
→ ph0b0s_ joined19:55
← tiin57 left19:55
→ tiin57 joined19:58
← ph0b0s left19:59
→ impermanence joined19:59
← Gurkenglas left20:00
→ gigasu_shida joined20:01
← luke-jr left20:02
→ heywood joined20:03
→ luke-jr joined20:04
← heywood left20:04
→ codebam_ joined20:05
angelo__ → ad__20:07
→ sudomann joined20:10
→ dudebbn_ joined20:12
sudomann I added my ssh public key to github. I attempted `git clone github.com:my-repo` but got permission denied20:13
osse sudomann: what exactly is my-repo?20:14
sudomann Am I supposed to provide it the path to my private key or something20:14
osse you're supposed to have the username20:14
sudomann I thought it assumed that based on logged in user20:14
My local username and github usernames match20:14
osse there is only one user and that is "git"20:14
there is a thingy in the web ui that contains the complete url20:15
sudomann my-repo is just a placeholder for my repo name20:15
osse yeah I get that20:15
but usually it's sudomann/my-repo20:15
→ otisolsen70 joined20:15
sudomann Hmm, i tried using the link from the web ui and got `git@github.com: Permission denied (publickey)`20:16
osse yeah but at least it's correct20:17
make ssh -T [email@hidden.address] After that then git will work20:17
does your key have a non-default name?20:17
sudomann yes20:17
osse then you must fiddle with .ssh/config20:17
→ PorkySpine joined20:18
← zebrag left20:19
osse https://docs.github.com/en/github/authenticating-to-github/connecting-to-github-with-ssh20:19
← shush left20:19
→ zebrag joined20:21
sudomann Copied this guys config and changed to my details and it worked https://gist.github.com/rbialek/1012262#file-config20:21
So in future if I dont alter the default key name, does it try them all or how does it know which one to use20:22
→ Xiti` joined20:22
sudomann The only parameters i provided when making the kay was to use ed15519 curve, a password and keyname20:23
← olx69 left20:23
← codebam_ left20:23
ikke It looks for keys with a known name20:23
id_rsa, id_dsa, id_ecdsa, id_ed25519 and others20:24
imMute see "IdentityFile" in 'man ssh_config' for the full list of identity filenames20:25
← tiin57 left20:25
→ supercoven joined20:26
→ bolovanos__ joined20:26
← Xiti left20:26
→ lungaro joined20:26
→ shush joined20:28
→ tiin57 joined20:28
← bolovanos_ left20:29
← supercoven_ left20:29
← veegee left20:32
→ nikivi[m] joined20:34
← abrac left20:37
→ abrac joined20:38
← sudomann left20:41
→ warthog9 joined20:43
← Xiti` left20:43
← heyitsrama left20:44
← Gramcor left20:44
→ heyitsrama joined20:45
→ cd joined20:52
← dpflick left20:52
← joako left20:54
← tiin57 left20:55
← abrac left20:55
→ joako joined20:56
→ veegee joined20:58
→ tiin57 joined20:58
→ Guest48529 joined20:59
→ m0viefreak joined21:00
→ Aquazi joined21:00
← arcatech left21:00
→ dpl__ joined21:00
→ brendan44 joined21:01
← brendan44 left21:01
→ brendan44 joined21:01
← sord937 left21:02
← dpl_ left21:02
→ Iarfen joined21:03
← Guest48529 left21:03
← nerdypepper left21:04
← roger_raymond left21:04
→ rishi` joined21:04
trewq when I do git fetch origin it does not pull the latest.. I have my config for the repo to be https://pastebin.com/raw/Cd9S19UB21:05
→ roger_raymond joined21:05
→ shack joined21:05
trewq I did git fetch origin21:05
→ appumoon joined21:05
← dzho left21:06
adder` is MERGE_HEAD a pointer to the latest commit of the branch being merged?21:06
→ nitrix_ joined21:06
← energizer left21:06
← SporkWitch left21:06
← nitrix left21:06
← beanthemoonman left21:06
← segnior left21:06
← shack_ left21:06
← jrahmy left21:06
← s17 left21:06
→ nerdypepper joined21:06
→ dzho joined21:07
← tureba left21:07
→ energizer joined21:07
→ tureba joined21:07
→ segnior joined21:07
→ SporkWitch joined21:07
→ s17 joined21:07
→ jrahmy joined21:08
← rishi` left21:09
rangergord migrating from svn to git today. wish me luck.21:09
sacrifice a developer to Torvalds for me21:10
← onizu left21:10
→ rishi` joined21:10
→ Benzi-Junior joined21:11
← kashike left21:11
trewq adder`: sorry were you asking me? If so, how do I check that - new to git21:11
← veegee left21:12
adder` no i was asking the channel21:12
osse adder`: the answer is yes21:12
adder` thanks osse21:12
→ fish3485 joined21:13
→ sudomann joined21:15
→ crose joined21:18
trewq when I do git status, I get "Your branch is behind 'origin/main' by 1 commit, and can be fast-forwarded" and I do git fetch origin, i get nothing, but I get the latest when I do git pull - why is that?21:20
→ veegee joined21:21
← sudomann left21:21
trewq is it because I am not tracking remote.. how do I find out?21:21
← veegee left21:21
← shabius_ left21:21
→ sudomann joined21:22
osse trewq: that21:22
trewq: that21:22
shit21:22
trewq: that's the normal behavior21:22
→ veegee joined21:22
osse pull = fetch followed by merge21:22
fetch just updates !remote_tr21:23
gitinfo [!remote_tracking_branch] Remote-tracking branches (branches which start with e.g. 'origin/', listed by 'git branch -r') are read-only mirrors of the branches in another repository. They're updated by 'git fetch'. You can't edit them directly (trying to check them out results in a !detached HEAD), but you can create a local branch based on a remote-tracking branch using e.g. 'git checkout -b <branch> <remote>/<branch>'21:23
← brendan44 left21:23
← crose left21:23
trewq ah ok thanks21:23
→ charlesr joined21:24
osse if you're not tracking then git status does not show any "your branch is behind blah blah"21:24
→ FFY00_ joined21:25
← tiin57 left21:25
← henri left21:25
← CryptoClub left21:26
← charlesr left21:26
→ CryptoClub joined21:27
← supercoven left21:27
← shush left21:27
← FFY00 left21:27
→ shush joined21:27
→ tiin57 joined21:28
← darkbit left21:28
← shush left21:32
← Borkr left21:33
← kprabhuv left21:35
→ dpflick joined21:35
← fish3485 left21:35
← noidea left21:36
→ shabius joined21:37
→ kashike joined21:39
→ mindCrime joined21:40
← shabius left21:41
← masterplain left21:41
← bookworm left21:43
→ shush joined21:43
→ brendan95 joined21:45
→ Xiti joined21:45
→ bookworm joined21:45
← Maxattax left21:45
← dskull left21:47
→ dskullz joined21:47
dskullz → dskull21:48
← amahl left21:49
← heyitsrama left21:50
→ heyitsrama joined21:51
← riksteri left21:52
← silverwhitefish left21:54
← tiin57 left21:55
← heyitsrama left21:55
← andy25225 left21:56
jess → J21:56
← shush left21:56
hexa- → H21:57
H → hexa-21:57
→ silverwhitefish joined21:58
← orbitex left21:58
→ tiin57 joined21:58
→ heyitsrama joined22:00
→ shush joined22:03
← shush left22:07
→ andy25225 joined22:07
→ shabius joined22:08
Hello71 !pull22:10
gitinfo pull=fetch+merge (or with flags/config also fetch+rebase). It is thus *not* the opposite of push in any sense. A good article that explains the difference between fetch and pull: http://longair.net/blog/2009/04/16/git-fetch-and-merge/22:10
→ shush joined22:14
← dpflick left22:14
← _noblegas left22:18
→ c4017w joined22:22
c4017w what's the syntax for selecting a range of commits during a rebase? For example I want to squash 3 commits starting 3 commits ago?22:23
← andy25225 left22:24
← tiin57 left22:25
← n3wborn left22:26
osse c4017w: you can only rebase onto a commit22:27
c4017w: everything *since* that commit up until the current commit will be rebased22:27
c4017w: sounds like you just want git rebase -i HEAD~322:27
← brendan95 left22:27
→ tiin57 joined22:28
→ xapgyep joined22:29
← finn_elija left22:32
← rosek86 left22:33
→ finn_elija joined22:34
→ andy25225 joined22:35
← Doraemon left22:38
← bolovanos__ left22:39
→ arcatech joined22:44
← m0viefreak left22:47
→ kerframil joined22:49
← wallacer left22:52
← waveclaw left22:54
→ wallacer joined22:54
← tiin57 left22:55
← silverwhitefish left22:55
→ silverwhitefish joined22:55
→ waveclaw joined22:57
→ tiin57 joined22:58
← otisolsen70 left23:02
c4017w osse, Ok I guess I can just checkout HEAD~3, then rebase -i HEAD~323:04
or just pick on the last 3 commits, what was I thinking...23:06
← clime left23:07
← wallacer left23:08
Hello71 you might also want to consider git commit --squash23:09
← finn_elija left23:10
→ finn_elija joined23:11
→ wallacer joined23:12
← Pickchea left23:12
← john_johnk left23:16
← Iarfen left23:21
← tiin57 left23:25
→ tiin57 joined23:28
← orbyt_v7 left23:32
→ c4017w_ joined23:34
→ Xenguy joined23:35
→ Iarfen joined23:35
J → jess23:36
← c4017w left23:37
→ ferdna joined23:44
lungaro can I access the logic to find where my .git resides in the git cli somewhere?23:46
ie, it searches up the path for a .git dir23:46
→ mknepper joined23:48
→ sgen joined23:49
← sgen left23:49
→ sgen joined23:50
→ gast0n joined23:52
← wallacer left23:53
→ wallacer joined23:54
← tiin57 left23:55
← PJBoy left23:59
→ tiin57 joined23:59
→ max_ joined23:59

Logs Search ←Prev date Next date→ Channels Documentation