Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: "Michał Górny" <mgorny@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Cc: kentfredric@×××××.com
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Portage Git migration - clean cut or git-cvsserver
Date: Fri, 01 Jun 2012 11:44:37
Message-Id: 20120601134439.049aa294@pomiocik.lan
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Portage Git migration - clean cut or git-cvsserver by Kent Fredric
On Fri, 1 Jun 2012 23:23:34 +1200
Kent Fredric <kentfredric@×××××.com> wrote:

> On 1 June 2012 22:54, Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o> wrote: > > Rebasing re-applies the same diff to the new head to give you a new > > set of commits.  When you apply the same diff to a different parent > > you end up with a different tree, so the tree signature won't be the > > same either. > > Not nessecarily. Given that : > > a file with a given content has a fixed SHA > A tree is just a list of these SHA's , and that in turn is referenced > by SHA, so if 2 commits have identical file content, their 'tree' sha > will be the same ( in theory ). > > So that means, if you perform a rebase, assuming the filesystem looks > the same as it did before the rebase, it will have the same SHA1 for > the tree, regardless of the process of how it got to be that way.
I don't think that 'not necessarily' makes any difference here. Maybe in our particular case this is not as likely as with regular source code tree but while rebasing you can hit conflicts. And then files start to change... -- Best regards, Michał Górny


File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature