Search Results

Search found 9301 results on 373 pages for 'git filter branch'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 23/373 | < Previous Page | 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30  | Next Page >

  • git: Is it possible to save the packed objects of a dry run and push them later?

    - by shovavnik
    I'm trying to push a bunch of commits that contain a lot of code and a few thousand MP3 and PDF files besides (ranging from 5-40 MB each). Git successfully packs the objects: C:\MyProject> git push Counting objects: 7582, done. Delta compression using up to 2 threads. Compressing objects: 100% (7510/7510), done. But it fails to send the push for some as yet unknown reason. The problem is that it takes it a very long time to repack the files (I'm on a battery-powered laptop and it took about 20 minutes to pack). So I guess my question can be phrases thus: Is it possible to save the packed objects created in a dry run? Once saved, is it possible to push those packed objects and avoid repacking? I looked it up in the git manual and elsewhere and couldn't find anything conclusive. Any help or pointers are appreciated.

    Read the article

  • What does "warning: unable to unlink website: Operation not permitted" mean when checking out a Git

    - by James A. Rosen
    I'm trying to create a local branch that tracks a remote branch. Here's what I get: > git checkout master > git push origin origin:refs/heads/myBranch Total 0 (delta 0), reused 0 (delta 0) To [email protected]:myrepo/myproject.git * [new branch] origin/HEAD -> myBranch > git fetch origin > git checkout --track -b myBranch origin/myBranch warning: unable to unlink website: Operation not permitted Branch myBranch set up to track remote branch myBranch from origin. Switched to a new branch 'myBranch' What does "warning: unable to unlink website: Operation not permitted" mean? Did everything work fine?

    Read the article

  • How do I show the SVN revision number in git log?

    - by Zain
    I'm customizing my git log to be all in 1 line. Specifically, I added the following alias: lg = log --graph --pretty=format:'%Cred%h%Creset - %C(yellow)%an%Creset - %s %Cgreen(%cr)%Creset' --abbrev-commit --date=relative So, when I run git lg, I see the following: * 41a49ad - zain - commit 1 message here (3 hours ago) * 6087812 - zain - commit 2 message here (5 hours ago) * 74842dd - zain - commit 3 message here (6 hours ago) However, I want to add the SVN revision number in there too, so it looks something like: * 41a49ad - r1593 - zain - commit 1 message here (3 hours ago) The normal git log shows you the SVN revision number, so I'm sure this must be possible. How do I do this?

    Read the article

  • Is there a way to tell git-status to ignore the effects of .gitignore files?

    - by meowsqueak
    I have configured numerous .gitignore files to filter out many different unwanted files from a set of about 6,000 untracked files. I want to do 'git add .' when I've got my filtered list looking the way I want it. But, then I want to disable the .gitignore filters temporarily to see what got left behind, and make sure there was nothing important accidentally filtered. I know that git-clean includes an option to ignore .gitignore files - is there a similar option for git-status? I could go through and delete all the .gitignore files, do the check, then restore them, but it seems there should be an easier way?

    Read the article

  • How to merge branches in Git by "hunk"

    - by user1316464
    Here's the scenario. I made a "dev" branch off the "master" branch and made a few new commits. Some of those changes are going to only be relevant to my local development machine. For example I changed a URL variable to point to a local apache server instead of the real URL that's posted online (I did this for speed during the testing phase). Now I'd like to incorporate my changes from the dev branch into the master branch but NOT those changes which only make sense in my local environment. I'd envisioned something like a merge --patch which would allow me to choose the changes I want to merge line by line. Alternatively maybe I could checkout the "master" branch, but keep the files in my working directory as they were in the "dev" branch, then do a git add --patch. Would that work?

    Read the article

  • Git is deleting an ignored file when i switch branches

    - by Max Williams
    I have one branch (let's call it B) that ignores a certain file, which isn't ignored in some other branches (eg branch A). When i switch from branch B to branch A, then back to B again, the file has been deleted. Is this normal? I can sort of see how it would happen, in the sense that branch B thinks it's not there, and branch A thinks that it is, so when i go back to B it 'tidies it away'. But it's kind of annoying. Any suggestions? thanks, max

    Read the article

  • git for personal (one-man) projects. Overkill?

    - by Anto
    I know, and use, two version control systems: Subversion and git. Subversion, as of now, gets used for personal projects where I am the only developer and git gets used for open source projects and projects where I believe others will also work on the project. This is mostly because of git's amazing forking and merging capabilities, where everyone may work on their own branch; very handy. Now, I use Subversion for personal projects, as I think git makes little sense there. It seems to be a little bit of overkill. It is OK for me if it is centralized (on my home server, usually) when I am the only developer; I take regular backups anyway. I don't need the ability to make my own branch, the main branch is my branch. Yes, SVN has simple support for branching, but much more powerful support for it makes no sense, I think. Merging can be a pain with it, or at least from my little experience. Is there any good reason for me to use git on personal projects, or is it just simply overkill?

    Read the article

  • Script/tool to import series of snapshots, each being a new edition, into GIT, populating source tree?

    - by Rob
    I've developed code locally and taken a fairly regular snapshot whenever I reach a significant point in development, e.g. a working build. So I have a long-ish list of about 40 folders, each folder being a snapshot e.g. in ascending date YYYYMMDD order, e.g.:- 20100523 20100614 20100721 20100722 20100809 20100901 20101001 20101003 20101104 20101119 20101203 20101218 20110102 I'm looking for a script to import each of these snapshots into GIT. The end result being that the latest code is the same as the last snapshot, and other editions are accessible and are as numbered. Some other requirements: that the latest edition is not cumulative of the previous snapshots, i.e., files that appeared in older snapshots but which don't appear in later ones (e.g. due to refactoring etc.) should not appear in the latest edition of the code. meanwhile, there should be continuity between files that do persist between snapshots. I would like GIT to know that there are previous editions of these files and not treat them as brand new files within each edition. Some background about my aim: I need to formally revision control this work rather than keep local private snapshot copies. I plan to release this work as open source, so version controlling would be highly recommended I am evaluating some of the current popular version control systems (Subversion and GIT) BUT I definitely need a working solution in GIT as well as subversion. I'm not looking to be persuaded to use one particular tool, I need a solution for each tool I am considering. (I haved posted an answer separately for each tool so separate camps of folks who have expertise in GIT and Subversion will be able to give focused answers on one or the other). The same but separate question for Subversion: Script/tool to import series of snapshots, each being a new revision, into Subversion, populating source tree?

    Read the article

  • How to convert a Bazaar repository to GIT repository?

    - by Naruto Uzumaki
    We have a large bazaar repository and we want to convert it to a git repository. The bazaar repository contains the folders of each of the interns. Any documentation/code prepared by interns is committed in their directory so there are a huge number of commits. What steps should be performed to securely convert the bazaar repository to a git repository so that we do not lose any commit information. We firstly need to create a backup of the existing bazaar repository and then convert it. Edit: I followed this link: http://librelist.com/browser//cville/2010/2/9/migrate-repository-bzr-to-git/ It's working fine on my system with Ubuntu. But when I try to run it on the actual server it gives me EOF error and crashes Starting export of 1036 revisions ... fatal: EOF in data (1825 bytes remaining) fast-import: dumping crash report to .git/fast_import_crash_11804 Edit 2: I also tried it on a new CentOS system and received the following error fatal: ambiguous argument 'HEAD': unknown revision or path not in the working tree. Use '--' to separate paths from revisions

    Read the article

  • Are there any reasons to use Bazaar over Hg or Git?

    - by NeuronQ
    The world of DVCSs seems split between Git and Mercurial nowadays, but lots of projects and places (like my new employer) use Bazaar. And it's not a thing of inertia where people just use something because "that's how it's always been done", these guys are agile and sometimes seem to embrace change just for the fun of having more things to fix. Yet no one gave me any convincing arguments for using Bzr over Hg or Git. I can get seeing Git as "too complicated" but you can't use this king of judgement between Hg and Bzr. So then, what are the features of Bazaar that would justify its use over Mercurial (or Git) in any given situation?

    Read the article

  • Is backing up a MySQL database in GIT a good idea?

    - by wobbily_col
    I am trying to improve the backup situation for my application. I have a Django application and MySQL database. I read an article suggesting backing up the database in Git. On the one hand I like it, as it will keep a copy of the data and the code in synch. But GIT is a designed for code, not for data. As such it will be doing a lot of extra work diffing the mysql dump every commit, which is not really necessary. If I compress the file before storing it, will git diff the files? (The dump file is currently 100MB uncompressed, 5.7Mb when bzipped). Edit: the code and database schema definitions are already in GIT, it is really the data I am concerned about backing up now.

    Read the article

  • Git: corrupt loose object

    - by NeoRiddle
    I was trying to merge my master branch with another one called pull-stage, but Git throws me this error: error: inflate: data stream error (invalid distance too far back) error: corrupt loose object '5a63450f4a0b72abbc1221ccb7d9f9bfef333250' fatal: loose object 5a63450f4a0b72abbc1221ccb7d9f9bfef333250 (stored in .git/objects/5a/63450f4a0b72abbc1221ccb7d9f9bfef333250) is corrupt How can I solve this issue? I have reviewed other posts, but with no successful results: How to replace corrupt Git objects with new ones created from my files, which are fine Git: "Corrupt loose object" Corrupted Git Repository (data stream error)

    Read the article

  • Is it possible to have all "git diff" commands use the "Python diff", in all git projects?

    - by EOL
    When including the line *.py diff=python in a local .gitattributes file, git diff produces nice labels for the different diff hunks of Python files (with the name of the function where the lines changed take place, etc.). Is is possible to ask git to use this diff mode for all Python files across all git projects? I tried to set a global ~/.gitattributes, but it is not used by local git repositories. Is there a more convenient method than initializing each new git project with a ln -s ~/.gitattributes?

    Read the article

  • How to set up multi users on dev server with git and github

    - by Derek Organ
    I'm working on lamp application. We have 2 servers (Debian) Live and Dev. I constantly work on dev main to add new features and fix bugs. When happy all works well I scp the relevant code to the Live system. Database (mysql) is local to each machine. Now this is pretty basic setup really and I want to improve the workflow a bit. I use git and github for version control. Admittedly I've only really used one branch. Their can be 3 different developers who work on the code at different times. We all use the same linux username to connect to the dev server and edit the code directly when needed. I usually then commit and push the code at the end of the day to github. One thing to bare in mind is it isn't easy to run this code on a local machine as there are many apache and subdomain configurations that wouldn't work on a local machine so it is important to work on the dev server not locally. I need to create a new process because we need to have a main trunk now and a branch with a big code re-write. What is the best way to do this. Should I create different unix logins for each developer and set up different working areas on the dev server for there changes? e.g. /var/www/mysite_derek /var/www/mysite_paul /var/www/mysite_mike my thinking is they can do a pull from the main branch and then create there own branch and merge it back in. I'm not sure how this will work though with git locally and with github. will i need to create different github user accounts as well. I'd like to do this the 'right' way and future proof for having lots of potential developers but I also don't want to over complicate it. I simple and elegant solution is preferred. any recommendations or suggestions?

    Read the article

  • How to cherry pick a range of commits and merge into another branch

    - by crazybyte
    Hi, I have the following repository layout: master branch (production) integration working What I want to achieve is to cherry pick a range of commits from the working branch and merge it into the integration branch. I pretty new to git and I can't figure out how to exactly do this (the cherry picking of commit ranges in one operation not the merging) without messing the repository up. Any pointers or thoughts on this? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Change the current branch to master in git

    - by Karel Bílek
    I have a repository in git. I made a branch, then did some changes both to the master and to the branch. Then, tens of commits later, I realized the branch is in much better state than the master, so I want the branch to "become" the master and disregard the changes on master. I cannot merge it, because I don't want to keep the changes on master. What should I do? (this will very possibly be a duplicate question, since it is trivial, but I have not found it here)

    Read the article

  • committing to a branch that's not checked out

    - by intuited
    I'm using git to version my home directories on a couple different machines. I'd like for them to each use separate branches and both pull from a common branch. So most commits should be made to that common branch, unless something specific to that machine is being committed, in which case the commit should go to the checked out, machine-specific branch. Switching branches is clearly not a very good option in this case. It's mentioned in this post that what I want to do is impossible, but I found that answer to be rather blunt and to perhaps not take into account the possibility of using the plumbing commands. Unfortunately I don't have enough reputation to comment on that thread. I rather suspect that there is some way to do this and am hoping to save myself an hour or few of questing for the answer by just asking you good folk. So is it possible to commit to a different branch without checking that branch out first? Ideally I'd like to use the index in the same way that git commit normally does.

    Read the article

  • How can I move all my modification to a branch

    - by michael
    Hi, I create a working repository in HG. And I have modified some files. How can i move my all my modification to a branch (a branch that I have not created)? (kind of 'git stash' and the move the stash away change to a branch. Actually, I am not sure how I can do that in git either. If you know, I appreciate if you can tell me in git as well) Thank you.

    Read the article

  • Create SVN branch from changes in trunk

    - by John
    I'm in a stupid situation: I have done some changes in a working copy of the TRUNK. Since the changes have not been tested, I'd like to transfer all the changes to a branch. According to the manual of Tortoise, Switch will lose all my modifications. Is there any way to keep my changes in the working copy and save them in a branch in the repository.

    Read the article

  • How do you make an existing git branch track a remote branch?

    - by Pat Notz
    I know how to make a new branch that tracks remote branches. But how do I make an existing branch track a remote branch. I know I can just edit the .git/config file but it seems there should be an easier way. EDIT It looks like this can't currently be done in a convenient way with the current (1.6.1.x) version of Git. UPDATE Git version = 1.7.0 supports this. See the accepted answer

    Read the article

  • How does Git know which Index blob to add to a tree?

    - by drozzy
    In Pro Git Ch9 the author says: Git normally creates a tree by taking the state of your staging area or index and writing a tree object from it. My question is how does git know which of two consequitive index entries to create the Tree object from? For example: $ echo 'First change' > one.txt $ git add one.txt $ find .git/objects -type f .git/objects/1f/755a7fffe4 //first index entry $ echo 'Second change' > one.txt $ git add one.txt $ find .git/objects -type f .git/objects/2d/234asdf2 //second index entry $ git commit -a -m "Initial commit" $ git cat-file master^{tree} 100644 blob 2d234asdf2 one.txt //How did it know not to take 1f755?? Does it just look at the blob timestamps? Also - what happens to the first blob created - no one is referencing it. Does it just get destroyed or forgotten?

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30  | Next Page >