Skip to content

Libgit2: bump to a0ce87c51 #235

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Oct 26, 2012
Merged

Libgit2: bump to a0ce87c51 #235

merged 1 commit into from
Oct 26, 2012

Conversation

ben
Copy link
Member

@ben ben commented Oct 25, 2012

So it'll have the progress-callback hotness!

Here's what happened in order to fix the tests:

  • Added the new GIT_STATUS_* enums. Their names are still bad, and they don't have comment docs.
  • Adjusted for the change in git_remote_download's signature
  • Adjust git_confifg_foreach & friends for new git_config_entry structure 🚧

@dahlbyk
Copy link
Member

dahlbyk commented Oct 25, 2012

#234 will take care of config. /cc @yorah

@ben
Copy link
Member Author

ben commented Oct 25, 2012

@dahlbyk I cheated on my test. The answers were in #234. 📚 Hopefully there won't be too many merge conflicts; I only changed a couple of things.

@nulltoken, let me know if this is satisfactory, and I'll squash it all into one commit.

@yorah
Copy link
Contributor

yorah commented Oct 26, 2012

🆒 I will rebase #234 on this when it gets merged.

var name = Utf8Marshaler.FromNative(namePtr);
var value = Utf8Marshaler.FromNative(valuePtr);
return new ConfigurationEntry(name, value);
return Proxy.git_config_foreach(LocalHandle, (entry) => {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I don't believe this is correct - entry corresponds to a git_config_entry * on the native side, but GitConfigEntry is a struct on the managed side. So, what we are really getting here is a pointer to a git_config_entry, and not the git_config_entry structure itself.

I think you could either:

  1. Take an IntPtr here for entry and marshal the structure manually
  2. Declare GitConfigEntry as a class instead of a struct

I would prefer option 1.

@ben
Copy link
Member Author

ben commented Oct 26, 2012

I took the liberty of writing UpdateLibgit2ToSha.ps1, which is not very well-written code. @nulltoken, if this rustles your jimmies, I'll kill it, but it (or something like it) would take some of the error out of building a proper libgit2.

public IntPtr valuePtr;
public uint level;
}
} No newline at end of file
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Look Ma! A missing trailing new line :)

@nulltoken
Copy link
Member

@ben Nice Job! TeamCity is smiling and so am I :) The two failing tests are the result of OpenSSL not being deployed yet (@dragan is aware of this).

Could you please squash all the update-related commits so that I can update vNext and make @jamill happier?

Regarding ddd41ba, I like it very much! Could you please attach it to #169 and turn the issue into a PR? I'd prefer to deal with this separately from the upgrade of libgit2 binaries.

@ben
Copy link
Member Author

ben commented Oct 26, 2012

Squashed, and I trimmed out the script that updates libgit2 (that's over in #169 now).

@dahlbyk
Copy link
Member

dahlbyk commented Oct 26, 2012

Re: FileStatus value names, this is what I came up with last week:

https://github.com/dahlbyk/libgit2sharp/compare/FileStatus

@nulltoken nulltoken merged commit bafa05c into libgit2:vNext Oct 26, 2012
@nulltoken
Copy link
Member

@ben Merged! Wooohoooo!!!!

Re: FileStatus value names, this is what I came up with last week:

@dahlbyk You're insanely good. Would you be so kind as to send a PR with the updated FileStatus..... Please? Say "Yes". Please?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants