![[tokkee]](http://tokkee.org/images/avatar.png){kind=avatar}
index 6bb32a8258de4fae12c7d7b76395af9c7ec69277..a417e592ac6a7ed72186dcfc241592ccdc25c9d2 100644 (file)
to import into git.
For our first example, we're going to start a totally new repository from
-scratch, with no pre-existing files, and we'll call it `git-tutorial`.
+scratch, with no pre-existing files, and we'll call it 'git-tutorial'.
To start up, create a subdirectory for it, change into that
-subdirectory, and initialize the git infrastructure with `git-init`:
+subdirectory, and initialize the git infrastructure with 'git-init':
------------------------------------------------
$ mkdir git-tutorial
$ cd git-tutorial
-$ git-init
+$ git init
------------------------------------------------
to which git will reply
which is just git's way of saying that you haven't been doing anything
strange, and that it will have created a local `.git` directory setup for
your new project. You will now have a `.git` directory, and you can
-inspect that with `ls`. For your new empty project, it should show you
+inspect that with 'ls'. For your new empty project, it should show you
three entries, among other things:
- a file called `HEAD`, that has `ref: refs/heads/master` in it.
- commit that index file as an object.
The first step is trivial: when you want to tell git about any changes
-to your working tree, you use the `git-update-index` program. That
+to your working tree, you use the 'git-update-index' program. That
program normally just takes a list of filenames you want to update, but
to avoid trivial mistakes, it refuses to add new entries to the index
(or remove existing ones) unless you explicitly tell it that you're
So to populate the index with the two files you just created, you can do
------------------------------------------------
-$ git-update-index --add hello example
+$ git update-index --add hello example
------------------------------------------------
and you have now told git to track those two files.
which correspond with the objects with names of `557db...` and
`f24c7...` respectively.
-If you want to, you can use `git-cat-file` to look at those objects, but
+If you want to, you can use 'git-cat-file' to look at those objects, but
you'll have to use the object name, not the filename of the object:
----------------
-$ git-cat-file -t 557db03de997c86a4a028e1ebd3a1ceb225be238
+$ git cat-file -t 557db03de997c86a4a028e1ebd3a1ceb225be238
----------------
-where the `-t` tells `git-cat-file` to tell you what the "type" of the
+where the `-t` tells 'git-cat-file' to tell you what the "type" of the
object is. git will tell you that you have a "blob" object (i.e., just a
regular file), and you can see the contents with
----------------
-$ git-cat-file "blob" 557db03
+$ git cat-file "blob" 557db03
----------------
which will print out "Hello World". The object `557db03` is nothing
Anyway, as we mentioned previously, you normally never actually take a
look at the objects themselves, and typing long 40-character hex
names is not something you'd normally want to do. The above digression
-was just to show that `git-update-index` did something magical, and
+was just to show that 'git-update-index' did something magical, and
actually saved away the contents of your files into the git object
database.
and you can now, since you told git about the previous state of `hello`, ask
git what has changed in the tree compared to your old index, using the
-`git-diff-files` command:
+'git-diff-files' command:
------------
-$ git-diff-files
+$ git diff-files
------------
Oops. That wasn't very readable. It just spit out its own internal
-version of a `diff`, but that internal version really just tells you
+version of a 'diff', but that internal version really just tells you
that it has noticed that "hello" has been modified, and that the old object
contents it had have been replaced with something else.
-To make it readable, we can tell git-diff-files to output the
+To make it readable, we can tell 'git-diff-files' to output the
differences as a patch, using the `-p` flag:
------------
-$ git-diff-files -p
+$ git diff-files -p
diff --git a/hello b/hello
index 557db03..263414f 100644
--- a/hello
i.e. the diff of the change we caused by adding another line to `hello`.
-In other words, `git-diff-files` always shows us the difference between
+In other words, 'git-diff-files' always shows us the difference between
what is recorded in the index, and what is currently in the working
tree. That's very useful.
-A common shorthand for `git-diff-files -p` is to just write `git
+A common shorthand for `git diff-files -p` is to just write `git
diff`, which will do the same thing.
------------
object as a 'commit' object together with an explanation of what the
tree was all about, along with information of how we came to that state.
-Creating a tree object is trivial, and is done with `git-write-tree`.
-There are no options or other input: git-write-tree will take the
+Creating a tree object is trivial, and is done with 'git-write-tree'.
+There are no options or other input: `git write-tree` will take the
current index state, and write an object that describes that whole
index. In other words, we're now tying together all the different
filenames with their contents (and their permissions), and we're
creating the equivalent of a git "directory" object:
------------------------------------------------
-$ git-write-tree
+$ git write-tree
------------------------------------------------
and this will just output the name of the resulting tree, in this case
----------------
which is another incomprehensible object name. Again, if you want to,
-you can use `git-cat-file -t 8988d\...` to see that this time the object
+you can use `git cat-file -t 8988d\...` to see that this time the object
is not a "blob" object, but a "tree" object (you can also use
-`git-cat-file` to actually output the raw object contents, but you'll see
+`git cat-file` to actually output the raw object contents, but you'll see
mainly a binary mess, so that's less interesting).
-However -- normally you'd never use `git-write-tree` on its own, because
+However -- normally you'd never use 'git-write-tree' on its own, because
normally you always commit a tree into a commit object using the
-`git-commit-tree` command. In fact, it's easier to not actually use
-`git-write-tree` on its own at all, but to just pass its result in as an
-argument to `git-commit-tree`.
+'git-commit-tree' command. In fact, it's easier to not actually use
+'git-write-tree' on its own at all, but to just pass its result in as an
+argument to 'git-commit-tree'.
-`git-commit-tree` normally takes several arguments -- it wants to know
+'git-commit-tree' normally takes several arguments -- it wants to know
what the 'parent' of a commit was, but since this is the first commit
ever in this new repository, and it has no parents, we only need to pass in
-the object name of the tree. However, `git-commit-tree` also wants to get a
+the object name of the tree. However, 'git-commit-tree' also wants to get a
commit message on its standard input, and it will write out the resulting
object name for the commit to its standard output.
And this is where we create the `.git/refs/heads/master` file
which is pointed at by `HEAD`. This file is supposed to contain
the reference to the top-of-tree of the master branch, and since
-that's exactly what `git-commit-tree` spits out, we can do this
+that's exactly what 'git-commit-tree' spits out, we can do this
all with a sequence of simple shell commands:
------------------------------------------------
-$ tree=$(git-write-tree)
-$ commit=$(echo 'Initial commit' | git-commit-tree $tree)
-$ git-update-ref HEAD $commit
+$ tree=$(git write-tree)
+$ commit=$(echo 'Initial commit' | git commit-tree $tree)
+$ git update-ref HEAD $commit
------------------------------------------------
In this case this creates a totally new commit that is not related to
Making a change
---------------
-Remember how we did the `git-update-index` on file `hello` and then we
+Remember how we did the 'git-update-index' on file `hello` and then we
changed `hello` afterward, and could compare the new state of `hello` with the
state we saved in the index file?
-Further, remember how I said that `git-write-tree` writes the contents
+Further, remember how I said that 'git-write-tree' writes the contents
of the *index* file to the tree, and thus what we just committed was in
fact the *original* contents of the file `hello`, not the new ones. We did
that on purpose, to show the difference between the index state, and the
state in the working tree, and how they don't have to match, even
when we commit things.
-As before, if we do `git-diff-files -p` in our git-tutorial project,
+As before, if we do `git diff-files -p` in our git-tutorial project,
we'll still see the same difference we saw last time: the index file
hasn't changed by the act of committing anything. However, now that we
have committed something, we can also learn to use a new command:
-`git-diff-index`.
+'git-diff-index'.
-Unlike `git-diff-files`, which showed the difference between the index
-file and the working tree, `git-diff-index` shows the differences
+Unlike 'git-diff-files', which showed the difference between the index
+file and the working tree, 'git-diff-index' shows the differences
between a committed *tree* and either the index file or the working
-tree. In other words, `git-diff-index` wants a tree to be diffed
+tree. In other words, 'git-diff-index' wants a tree to be diffed
against, and before we did the commit, we couldn't do that, because we
didn't have anything to diff against.
But now we can do
----------------
-$ git-diff-index -p HEAD
+$ git diff-index -p HEAD
----------------
-(where `-p` has the same meaning as it did in `git-diff-files`), and it
+(where `-p` has the same meaning as it did in 'git-diff-files'), and it
will show us the same difference, but for a totally different reason.
Now we're comparing the working tree not against the index file,
but against the tree we just wrote. It just so happens that those two
which ends up doing the above for you.
-In other words, `git-diff-index` normally compares a tree against the
+In other words, 'git-diff-index' normally compares a tree against the
working tree, but when given the `\--cached` flag, it is told to
instead compare against just the index cache contents, and ignore the
current working tree state entirely. Since we just wrote the index
-file to HEAD, doing `git-diff-index \--cached -p HEAD` should thus return
+file to HEAD, doing `git diff-index \--cached -p HEAD` should thus return
an empty set of differences, and that's exactly what it does.
[NOTE]
================
-`git-diff-index` really always uses the index for its
+'git-diff-index' really always uses the index for its
comparisons, and saying that it compares a tree against the working
tree is thus not strictly accurate. In particular, the list of
files to compare (the "meta-data") *always* comes from the index file,
update the index cache:
------------------------------------------------
-$ git-update-index hello
+$ git update-index hello
------------------------------------------------
(note how we didn't need the `\--add` flag this time, since git knew
about the file already).
-Note what happens to the different `git-diff-\*` versions here. After
-we've updated `hello` in the index, `git-diff-files -p` now shows no
-differences, but `git-diff-index -p HEAD` still *does* show that the
+Note what happens to the different 'git-diff-\*' versions here. After
+we've updated `hello` in the index, `git diff-files -p` now shows no
+differences, but `git diff-index -p HEAD` still *does* show that the
current state is different from the state we committed. In fact, now
-`git-diff-index` shows the same difference whether we use the `--cached`
+'git-diff-index' shows the same difference whether we use the `--cached`
flag or not, since now the index is coherent with the working tree.
Now, since we've updated `hello` in the index, we can commit the new
looking at what `git commit` really does, feel free to investigate:
it's a few very simple shell scripts to generate the helpful (?) commit
message headers, and a few one-liners that actually do the
-commit itself (`git-commit`).
+commit itself ('git-commit').
Inspecting Changes
While creating changes is useful, it's even more useful if you can tell
later what changed. The most useful command for this is another of the
-`diff` family, namely `git-diff-tree`.
+'diff' family, namely 'git-diff-tree'.
-`git-diff-tree` can be given two arbitrary trees, and it will tell you the
+'git-diff-tree' can be given two arbitrary trees, and it will tell you the
differences between them. Perhaps even more commonly, though, you can
give it just a single commit object, and it will figure out the parent
of that commit itself, and show the difference directly. Thus, to get
the same diff that we've already seen several times, we can now do
----------------
-$ git-diff-tree -p HEAD
+$ git diff-tree -p HEAD
----------------
(again, `-p` means to show the difference as a human-readable patch),
+-----------+
============
-More interestingly, you can also give `git-diff-tree` the `--pretty` flag,
+More interestingly, you can also give 'git-diff-tree' the `--pretty` flag,
which tells it to also show the commit message and author and date of the
commit, and you can tell it to show a whole series of diffs.
Alternatively, you can tell it to be "silent", and not show the diffs at
all, but just show the actual commit message.
-In fact, together with the `git-rev-list` program (which generates a
-list of revisions), `git-diff-tree` ends up being a veritable fount of
-changes. A trivial (but very useful) script called `git-whatchanged` is
+In fact, together with the 'git-rev-list' program (which generates a
+list of revisions), 'git-diff-tree' ends up being a veritable fount of
+changes. A trivial (but very useful) script called 'git-whatchanged' is
included with git which does exactly this, and shows a log of recent
activities.
powerful)
----------------
-$ git-whatchanged -p
+$ git whatchanged -p
----------------
and you will see exactly what has changed in the repository over its
If this is a problem because it is huge, you can hide it by setting
the log.showroot configuration variable to false. Having this, you
can still show it for each command just adding the `\--root` option,
-which is a flag for `git-diff-tree` accepted by both commands.
+which is a flag for 'git-diff-tree' accepted by both commands.
With that, you should now be having some inkling of what git does, and
can explore on your own.
[NOTE]
Most likely, you are not directly using the core
-git Plumbing commands, but using Porcelain such as `git-add`, `git-rm'
+git Plumbing commands, but using Porcelain such as 'git-add', `git-rm'
and `git-commit'.
message, along with optionally a PGP signature that says that yes,
you really did
that tag. You create these annotated tags with either the `-a` or
-`-s` flag to `git tag`:
+`-s` flag to 'git-tag':
----------------
$ git tag -s <tagname>
history outside the project you created.
- if you want to move or duplicate a git repository, you can do so. There
- is `git clone` command, but if all you want to do is just to
+ is 'git-clone' command, but if all you want to do is just to
create a copy of your repository (with all the full history that
went along with it), you can do so with a regular
`cp -a git-tutorial new-git-tutorial`.
So after you do a `cp -a` to create a new copy, you'll want to do
+
----------------
-$ git-update-index --refresh
+$ git update-index --refresh
----------------
+
in the new repository to make sure that the index file is up-to-date.
Note that the second point is true even across machines. You can
duplicate a remote git repository with *any* regular copy mechanism, be it
-`scp`, `rsync` or `wget`.
+'scp', 'rsync' or 'wget'.
When copying a remote repository, you'll want to at a minimum update the
index cache when you do this, and especially with other peoples'
repositories you often want to make sure that the index cache is in some
known state (you don't know *what* they've done and not yet checked in),
-so usually you'll precede the `git-update-index` with a
+so usually you'll precede the 'git-update-index' with a
----------------
-$ git-read-tree --reset HEAD
-$ git-update-index --refresh
+$ git read-tree --reset HEAD
+$ git update-index --refresh
----------------
which will force a total index re-build from the tree pointed to by `HEAD`.
-It resets the index contents to `HEAD`, and then the `git-update-index`
+It resets the index contents to `HEAD`, and then the 'git-update-index'
makes sure to match up all index entries with the checked-out files.
If the original repository had uncommitted changes in its
-working tree, `git-update-index --refresh` notices them and
+working tree, `git update-index --refresh` notices them and
tells you they need to be updated.
The above can also be written as simply
and in fact a lot of the common git command combinations can be scripted
with the `git xyz` interfaces. You can learn things by just looking
at what the various git scripts do. For example, `git reset` used to be
-the above two lines implemented in `git-reset`, but some things like
-`git status` and `git commit` are slightly more complex scripts around
+the above two lines implemented in 'git-reset', but some things like
+'git-status' and 'git-commit' are slightly more complex scripts around
the basic git commands.
Many (most?) public remote repositories will not contain any of
followed by
----------------
-$ git-read-tree HEAD
+$ git read-tree HEAD
----------------
to populate the index. However, now you have populated the index, and
those, you'd check them out with
----------------
-$ git-checkout-index -u -a
+$ git checkout-index -u -a
----------------
where the `-u` flag means that you want the checkout to keep the index
up-to-date (so that you don't have to refresh it afterward), and the
`-a` flag means "check out all files" (if you have a stale copy or an
older version of a checked out tree you may also need to add the `-f`
-flag first, to tell git-checkout-index to *force* overwriting of any old
+flag first, to tell 'git-checkout-index' to *force* overwriting of any old
files).
Again, this can all be simplified with
================================================
If you make the decision to start your new branch at some
other point in the history than the current `HEAD`, you can do so by
-just telling `git checkout` what the base of the checkout would be.
+just telling 'git-checkout' what the base of the checkout would be.
In other words, if you have an earlier tag or branch, you'd just do
------------
which will simply _create_ the branch, but will not do anything further.
You can then later -- once you decide that you want to actually develop
-on that branch -- switch to that branch with a regular `git checkout`
+on that branch -- switch to that branch with a regular 'git-checkout'
with the branchname as the argument.
------------------------------------------------
Here, we just added another line to `hello`, and we used a shorthand for
-doing both `git-update-index hello` and `git commit` by just giving the
+doing both `git update-index hello` and `git commit` by just giving the
filename directly to `git commit`, with an `-i` flag (it tells
git to 'include' that file in addition to what you have done to
the index file so far when making the commit). The `-m` flag is to give the
histories. You can also see exactly how they came to be from a common
source.
-Anyway, let's exit `gitk` (`^Q` or the File menu), and decide that we want
+Anyway, let's exit 'gitk' (`^Q` or the File menu), and decide that we want
to merge the work we did on the `mybranch` branch into the `master`
branch (which is currently our `HEAD` too). To do that, there's a nice
-script called `git merge`, which wants to know which branches you want
+script called 'git-merge', which wants to know which branches you want
to resolve and what the merge is all about:
------------
which will very loudly warn you that you're now committing a merge
(which is correct, so never mind), and you can write a small merge
-message about your adventures in git-merge-land.
+message about your adventures in 'git-merge'-land.
After you're done, start up `gitk \--all` to see graphically what the
history looks like. Notice that `mybranch` still exists, and you can
environment, is `git show-branch`.
------------------------------------------------
-$ git-show-branch --topo-order --more=1 master mybranch
+$ git show-branch --topo-order --more=1 master mybranch
* [master] Merge work in mybranch
! [mybranch] Some work.
--
before the commit log message is a short name you can use to
name the commit. In the above example, 'master' and 'mybranch'
are branch heads. 'master^' is the first parent of 'master'
-branch head. Please see 'git-rev-parse' documentation if you
+branch head. Please see linkgit:git-rev-parse[1] if you want to
see more complex cases.
[NOTE]
Without the '--more=1' option, 'git-show-branch' would not output the
'[master^]' commit, as '[mybranch]' commit is a common ancestor of
-both 'master' and 'mybranch' tips. Please see 'git-show-branch'
-documentation for details.
+both 'master' and 'mybranch' tips. Please see linkgit:git-show-branch[1]
+for details.
[NOTE]
If there were more commits on the 'master' branch after the merge, the
Now, let's pretend you are the one who did all the work in
`mybranch`, and the fruit of your hard work has finally been merged
to the `master` branch. Let's go back to `mybranch`, and run
-`git merge` to get the "upstream changes" back to your branch.
+'git-merge' to get the "upstream changes" back to your branch.
------------
$ git checkout mybranch
often called 'fast forward' merge.
You can run `gitk \--all` again to see how the commit ancestry
-looks like, or run `show-branch`, which tells you this.
+looks like, or run 'show-branch', which tells you this.
------------------------------------------------
$ git show-branch master mybranch
It's usually much more common that you merge with somebody else than
merging with your own branches, so it's worth pointing out that git
makes that very easy too, and in fact, it's not that different from
-doing a `git merge`. In fact, a remote merge ends up being nothing
+doing a 'git-merge'. In fact, a remote merge ends up being nothing
more than "fetch the work from a remote repository into a temporary tag"
-followed by a `git merge`.
+followed by a 'git-merge'.
Fetching from a remote repository is done by, unsurprisingly,
-`git fetch`:
+'git-fetch':
----------------
$ git fetch <remote-repository>
Local directory::
`/path/to/repo.git/`
+
-This transport is the same as SSH transport but uses `sh` to run
+This transport is the same as SSH transport but uses 'sh' to run
both ends on the local machine instead of running other end on
-the remote machine via `ssh`.
+the remote machine via 'ssh'.
git Native::
`git://remote.machine/path/to/repo.git/`
transports', because they do not require any git aware smart
server like git Native transport does. Any stock HTTP server
that does not even support directory index would suffice. But
-you must prepare your repository with `git-update-server-info`
+you must prepare your repository with 'git-update-server-info'
to help dumb transport downloaders.
Once you fetch from the remote repository, you `merge` that
[NOTE]
You could do without using any branches at all, by
keeping as many local repositories as you would like to have
-branches, and merging between them with `git pull`, just like
+branches, and merging between them with 'git-pull', just like
you merge between branches. The advantage of this approach is
that it lets you keep a set of files for each `branch` checked
out and you may find it easier to switch back and forth if you
$ git config remote.linus.url http://www.kernel.org/pub/scm/git/git.git/
------------------------------------------------
-and use the "linus" keyword with `git pull` instead of the full URL.
+and use the "linus" keyword with 'git-pull' instead of the full URL.
Examples.
+* [master^] Some fun.
------------
-Remember, before running `git merge`, our `master` head was at
+Remember, before running 'git-merge', our `master` head was at
"Some fun." commit, while our `mybranch` head was at "Some
work." commit.
`git merge` command, when merging two branches, uses 3-way merge
algorithm. First, it finds the common ancestor between them.
-The command it uses is `git-merge-base`:
+The command it uses is 'git-merge-base':
------------
-$ mb=$(git-merge-base HEAD mybranch)
+$ mb=$(git merge-base HEAD mybranch)
------------
The command writes the commit object name of the common ancestor
tell it by:
------------
-$ git-name-rev $mb
+$ git name-rev $mb
my-first-tag
------------
this:
------------
-$ git-read-tree -m -u $mb HEAD mybranch
+$ git read-tree -m -u $mb HEAD mybranch
------------
-This is the same `git-read-tree` command we have already seen,
+This is the same 'git-read-tree' command we have already seen,
but it takes three trees, unlike previous examples. This reads
the contents of each tree into different 'stage' in the index
file (the first tree goes to stage 1, the second to stage 2,
inspect the index file with this command:
------------
-$ git-ls-files --stage
+$ git ls-files --stage
100644 7f8b141b65fdcee47321e399a2598a235a032422 0 example
100644 263414f423d0e4d70dae8fe53fa34614ff3e2860 1 hello
100644 06fa6a24256dc7e560efa5687fa84b51f0263c3a 2 hello
To look at only non-zero stages, use `\--unmerged` flag:
------------
-$ git-ls-files --unmerged
+$ git ls-files --unmerged
100644 263414f423d0e4d70dae8fe53fa34614ff3e2860 1 hello
100644 06fa6a24256dc7e560efa5687fa84b51f0263c3a 2 hello
100644 cc44c73eb783565da5831b4d820c962954019b69 3 hello
The next step of merging is to merge these three versions of the
file, using 3-way merge. This is done by giving
-`git-merge-one-file` command as one of the arguments to
-`git-merge-index` command:
+'git-merge-one-file' command as one of the arguments to
+'git-merge-index' command:
------------
-$ git-merge-index git-merge-one-file hello
+$ git merge-index git-merge-one-file hello
Auto-merging hello.
merge: warning: conflicts during merge
ERROR: Merge conflict in hello.
fatal: merge program failed
------------
-`git-merge-one-file` script is called with parameters to
+'git-merge-one-file' script is called with parameters to
describe those three versions, and is responsible to leave the
merge results in the working tree.
It is a fairly straightforward shell script, and
-eventually calls `merge` program from RCS suite to perform a
-file-level 3-way merge. In this case, `merge` detects
+eventually calls 'merge' program from RCS suite to perform a
+file-level 3-way merge. In this case, 'merge' detects
conflicts, and the merge result with conflict marks is left in
the working tree.. This can be seen if you run `ls-files
--stage` again at this point:
------------
-$ git-ls-files --stage
+$ git ls-files --stage
100644 7f8b141b65fdcee47321e399a2598a235a032422 0 example
100644 263414f423d0e4d70dae8fe53fa34614ff3e2860 1 hello
100644 06fa6a24256dc7e560efa5687fa84b51f0263c3a 2 hello
------------
This is the state of the index file and the working file after
-`git merge` returns control back to you, leaving the conflicting
+'git-merge' returns control back to you, leaving the conflicting
merge for you to resolve. Notice that the path `hello` is still
-unmerged, and what you see with `git diff` at this point is
+unmerged, and what you see with 'git-diff' at this point is
differences since stage 2 (i.e. your version).
Publishing the changes from your local (private) repository to
your remote (public) repository requires a write privilege on
the remote machine. You need to have an SSH account there to
-run a single command, `git-receive-pack`.
+run a single command, 'git-receive-pack'.
First, you need to create an empty repository on the remote
machine that will house your public repository. This empty
done only once.
[NOTE]
-`git push` uses a pair of programs,
-`git-send-pack` on your local machine, and `git-receive-pack`
+'git-push' uses a pair of programs,
+'git-send-pack' on your local machine, and 'git-receive-pack'
on the remote machine. The communication between the two over
the network internally uses an SSH connection.
------------
Then, make that directory into a git repository by running
-`git init`, but this time, since its name is not the usual
+'git-init', but this time, since its name is not the usual
`.git`, we do things slightly differently:
------------
-$ GIT_DIR=my-git.git git-init
+$ GIT_DIR=my-git.git git init
------------
Make sure this directory is available for others you want your
changes to be pulled by via the transport of your choice. Also
-you need to make sure that you have the `git-receive-pack`
+you need to make sure that you have the 'git-receive-pack'
program on the `$PATH`.
[NOTE]
Many installations of sshd do not invoke your shell as the login
shell when you directly run programs; what this means is that if
-your login shell is `bash`, only `.bashrc` is read and not
+your login shell is 'bash', only `.bashrc` is read and not
`.bash_profile`. As a workaround, make sure `.bashrc` sets up
-`$PATH` so that you can run `git-receive-pack` program.
+`$PATH` so that you can run 'git-receive-pack' program.
[NOTE]
If you plan to publish this repository to be accessed over http,
-you should do `chmod +x my-git.git/hooks/post-update` at this
-point. This makes sure that every time you push into this
-repository, `git-update-server-info` is run.
+you should do `mv my-git.git/hooks/post-update.sample
+my-git.git/hooks/post-update` at this point.
+This makes sure that every time you push into this
+repository, `git update-server-info` is run.
Your "public repository" is now ready to accept your changes.
Come back to the machine you have your private repository. From
will do it for you. If you followed the tutorial examples, you
would have accumulated about 17 objects in `.git/objects/??/`
-directories by now. `git repack` tells you how many objects it
+directories by now. 'git-repack' tells you how many objects it
packed, and stores the packed file in `.git/objects/pack`
directory.
in the pack, and the latter holds the index for random
access.
-If you are paranoid, running `git-verify-pack` command would
+If you are paranoid, running 'git-verify-pack' command would
detect if you have a corrupt pack, but do not worry too much.
Our programs are always perfect ;-).
If other people are pulling from your repository over dumb
transport protocols (HTTP), you need to keep this repository
'dumb transport friendly'. After `git init`,
-`$GIT_DIR/hooks/post-update` copied from the standard templates
-would contain a call to `git-update-server-info` but the
-`post-update` hook itself is disabled by default -- enable it
-with `chmod +x post-update`. This makes sure `git-update-server-info`
-keeps the necessary files up-to-date.
+`$GIT_DIR/hooks/post-update.sample` copied from the standard templates
+would contain a call to 'git-update-server-info'
+but you need to manually enable the hook with
+`mv post-update.sample post-update`. This makes sure
+'git-update-server-info' keeps the necessary files up-to-date.
3. Push into the public repository from your primary
repository.
-4. `git repack` the public repository. This establishes a big
+4. 'git-repack' the public repository. This establishes a big
pack that contains the initial set of objects as the
- baseline, and possibly `git prune` if the transport
+ baseline, and possibly 'git-prune' if the transport
used for pulling from your repository supports packed
repositories.
6. Push your changes to the public repository, and announce it
to the public.
-7. Every once in a while, "git repack" the public repository.
+7. Every once in a while, "git-repack" the public repository.
Go back to step 5. and continue working.
A recommended work cycle for a "subsystem maintainer" who works
on that project and has an own "public repository" goes like this:
-1. Prepare your work repository, by `git clone` the public
+1. Prepare your work repository, by 'git-clone' the public
repository of the "project lead". The URL used for the
initial cloning is stored in the remote.origin.url
configuration variable.
point at the repository you are borrowing from.
4. Push into the public repository from your primary
- repository. Run `git repack`, and possibly `git prune` if the
+ repository. Run 'git-repack', and possibly 'git-prune' if the
transport used for pulling from your repository supports
packed repositories.
"project lead" and possibly your "sub-subsystem
maintainers" to pull from it.
-7. Every once in a while, `git repack` the public repository.
+7. Every once in a while, 'git-repack' the public repository.
Go back to step 5. and continue working.
not have a "public" repository is somewhat different. It goes
like this:
-1. Prepare your work repository, by `git clone` the public
+1. Prepare your work repository, by 'git-clone' the public
repository of the "project lead" (or a "subsystem
maintainer", if you work on a subsystem). The URL used for
the initial cloning is stored in the remote.origin.url
$ git reset --hard master~2
------------
-You can make sure 'git show-branch' matches the state before
-those two 'git merge' you just did. Then, instead of running
-two 'git merge' commands in a row, you would merge these two
+You can make sure `git show-branch` matches the state before
+those two 'git-merge' you just did. Then, instead of running
+two 'git-merge' commands in a row, you would merge these two
branch heads (this is known as 'making an Octopus'):
------------
SEE ALSO
--------
linkgit:gittutorial[7], linkgit:gittutorial-2[7],
-linkgit:giteveryday[7], linkgit:gitcvs-migration[7],
+linkgit:everyday[7], linkgit:gitcvs-migration[7],
link:user-manual.html[The Git User's Manual]
GIT