Skip to content
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

Linking a project to its blobs/filename #39

Closed
k----n opened this issue Sep 11, 2023 · 4 comments
Closed

Linking a project to its blobs/filename #39

k----n opened this issue Sep 11, 2023 · 4 comments

Comments

@k----n
Copy link
Contributor

k----n commented Sep 11, 2023

It's trivial to list a project to a blob, or a project to a filename with P2b and P2f.

What's the best way to link the b and f together?

It is possible to use P2f then f2b and checking if the f2b output (which can be quite long) is within P2b, but it seems like there should be an easier way to do this.

Here are some of the strategies that didn't work:

# Doesn't work because it will list all blobs with the same filename
echo "Stijnn_Section_05" | getValues -f P2c | cut -d\; -f2- | getValues -f c2f | cut -d\; -f2 | getValues -f f2b

# Doesn't work because it will list filenames that are not part of a project
echo "Stijnn_Section_05" | getValues -f P2b | cut -d\; -f2- | getValues -f b2f

# Doesn't work because it will output blobs that are not part of the project
echo "Stijnn_Section_05" | getValues -f P2f | cut -d\; -f2- | getValues -f f2b
@k----n
Copy link
Contributor Author

k----n commented Sep 11, 2023

It also appears that the output of P2b and P2f are not 1 to 1, i.e., the outputs do not align.

When I run:

echo "Stijnn_Section_05" | getValues -f P2f | head -n1

The first filename is .gitignore

When I check the filename of the first blob for .gitignore, I get no results.

echo "Stijnn_Section_05" | getValues -f P2b | head -n1 | cut -d\; -f2- | getValues -f b2f | grep gitignore

@k----n
Copy link
Contributor Author

k----n commented Sep 12, 2023

P2c -> c2f and P2b -> b2f are also not 1 to 1.

@k----n
Copy link
Contributor Author

k----n commented Sep 12, 2023

Seems to be a repeat of my previous question here: #36

Possible solution is outlined here: woc-hack/tutorial#46

@k----n k----n closed this as completed Sep 12, 2023
@audrism
Copy link
Collaborator

audrism commented Sep 13, 2023

Correct: the relations return sets, to get the full tuple, you need to use one form of c2fbb/b2obcf/ob2bcf

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

No branches or pull requests

2 participants