![[tokkee]](http://tokkee.org/images/avatar.png){kind=avatar}
Merge branch 'master' into np/dreflog
This is to resolve conflicts early in preparation for possible
inclusion of "reflog on detached HEAD" series by Nico, as having
it in 1.5.0 would really help us remove confusion between
detached and attached states.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
This is to resolve conflicts early in preparation for possible
inclusion of "reflog on detached HEAD" series by Nico, as having
it in 1.5.0 would really help us remove confusion between
detached and attached states.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Default GIT_MERGE_VERBOSITY to 5 during tests.
Its really nice to be able to run a test with -v and automatically
see the "debugging" dump from merge-recursive, especially if we
are actually trying to debug merge-recursive.
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Its really nice to be able to run a test with -v and automatically
see the "debugging" dump from merge-recursive, especially if we
are actually trying to debug merge-recursive.
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Keep untracked files not involved in a merge.
My earlier fix (8371234e) to delete renamed tracked files from the
working directory also caused merge-recursive to delete untracked
files that were in the working directory.
The problem here is merge-recursive is deleting the working directory
file without regard for which branch it was associated with. What we
really want to do during a merge is to only delete files that were
renamed by the branch we are merging into the current branch,
and that are still tracked by the current branch. These files
definitely don't belong in the working directory anymore.
Anything else is either a merge conflict (already handled in other
parts of the code) or a file that is untracked by the current branch
and thus is not even participating in the merge. Its this latter
class that must be left alone.
For this fix to work we are now assuming that the first non-base
argument passed to git-merge-recursive always corresponds to the
working directory. This is already true for all in-tree callers
of merge-recursive. This assumption is also supported by the
long time usage message of "<base> ... -- <head> <remote>", where
"<head>" is implied to be HEAD, which is generally assumed to be
the current tree-ish.
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
My earlier fix (8371234e) to delete renamed tracked files from the
working directory also caused merge-recursive to delete untracked
files that were in the working directory.
The problem here is merge-recursive is deleting the working directory
file without regard for which branch it was associated with. What we
really want to do during a merge is to only delete files that were
renamed by the branch we are merging into the current branch,
and that are still tracked by the current branch. These files
definitely don't belong in the working directory anymore.
Anything else is either a merge conflict (already handled in other
parts of the code) or a file that is untracked by the current branch
and thus is not even participating in the merge. Its this latter
class that must be left alone.
For this fix to work we are now assuming that the first non-base
argument passed to git-merge-recursive always corresponds to the
working directory. This is already true for all in-tree callers
of merge-recursive. This assumption is also supported by the
long time usage message of "<base> ... -- <head> <remote>", where
"<head>" is implied to be HEAD, which is generally assumed to be
the current tree-ish.
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Assorted typo fixes
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Cleanup subcommand documentation for git-remote.
Jakub Narebski pointed out the positional notation in git-remote's
documentation was very confusing, especially now that we have 3
supported subcommands. Instead of referring to subcommands by
position, refer to them by name.
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Jakub Narebski pointed out the positional notation in git-remote's
documentation was very confusing, especially now that we have 3
supported subcommands. Instead of referring to subcommands by
position, refer to them by name.
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
git-config --rename-section could rename wrong section
The "git-config --rename-section" implementation would match sections
that are substrings of the section name to be renamed.
Signed-off-by: Pavel Roskin <proski@gnu.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
The "git-config --rename-section" implementation would match sections
that are substrings of the section name to be renamed.
Signed-off-by: Pavel Roskin <proski@gnu.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
combine-diff: special case --unified=0
Even when --unified=0 is given, the main loop to show the
combined textual diff needs to handle a line that is unchanged
but has lines that were deleted relative to a parent before it
(because that is where the lost lines hang). However, such a
line should not be emitted in the final output.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Even when --unified=0 is given, the main loop to show the
combined textual diff needs to handle a line that is unchanged
but has lines that were deleted relative to a parent before it
(because that is where the lost lines hang). However, such a
line should not be emitted in the final output.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Why is it bad to rewind a branch that has already been pushed out?
I was reading the tutorial and noticed that we say this:
Also, don't use "git reset" on a publicly-visible branch that
other developers pull from, as git will be confused by history
that disappears in this way.
I do not think this is a good explanation. For example, if we
do this:
(1) I build a series and push it out.
---o---o---o---j
(2) Alice clones from me, and builds two commits on top of it.
---o---o---o---j---a---a
(3) I rewind one and build a few, and push them out.
---o---o---o...j
\
h---h---h---h
(4) Alice pulls from me again:
---o---o---o---j---a---a---*
\ /
h---h---h---h
Contrary to the description, git will happily have Alice merge
between the two branches, and never gets confused.
Maybe I did not want to have 'j' because it was an incomplete
solution to some problem, and Alice may have fixed it up with
her changes, while I abandoned that approach I started with 'j',
and worked on something completely unrelated in the four 'h'
commits. In such a case, the merge Alice would make would be
very sensible, and after she makes the merge if I pull from her,
the world will be perfect. I started something with 'j' and
dropped the ball, Alice picked it up and perfected it while I
went on to work on something else with 'h'. This would be a
perfect example of distributed parallel collaboration. There is
nothing confused about it.
The case the rewinding becomes problematic is if the work done
in 'h' tries to solve the same problem as 'j' tried to solve in
a different way. Then the merge forced on Alice would make her
pick between my previous attempt with her fixups (j+a) and my
second attempt (h). If 'a' commits were to fix up what 'j'
started, presumably Alice already studied and knows enough about
the problem so she should be able to make an informed decision
to pick between what 'j+a' and 'h' do.
A lot worse case is if Alice's work is not at all related to
what 'j' wanted to do (she did not mean to pick up from where I
left off -- she just wanted to work on something different).
Then she would not be familiar enough with what 'j' and 'h'
tried to achieve, and I'd be forcing her to pick between the
two. Of course if she can make the right decision, then again
that is a perfect example of distributed collaboration, but that
does not change the fact that I'd be forcing her to clean up my
mess.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
I was reading the tutorial and noticed that we say this:
Also, don't use "git reset" on a publicly-visible branch that
other developers pull from, as git will be confused by history
that disappears in this way.
I do not think this is a good explanation. For example, if we
do this:
(1) I build a series and push it out.
---o---o---o---j
(2) Alice clones from me, and builds two commits on top of it.
---o---o---o---j---a---a
(3) I rewind one and build a few, and push them out.
---o---o---o...j
\
h---h---h---h
(4) Alice pulls from me again:
---o---o---o---j---a---a---*
\ /
h---h---h---h
Contrary to the description, git will happily have Alice merge
between the two branches, and never gets confused.
Maybe I did not want to have 'j' because it was an incomplete
solution to some problem, and Alice may have fixed it up with
her changes, while I abandoned that approach I started with 'j',
and worked on something completely unrelated in the four 'h'
commits. In such a case, the merge Alice would make would be
very sensible, and after she makes the merge if I pull from her,
the world will be perfect. I started something with 'j' and
dropped the ball, Alice picked it up and perfected it while I
went on to work on something else with 'h'. This would be a
perfect example of distributed parallel collaboration. There is
nothing confused about it.
The case the rewinding becomes problematic is if the work done
in 'h' tries to solve the same problem as 'j' tried to solve in
a different way. Then the merge forced on Alice would make her
pick between my previous attempt with her fixups (j+a) and my
second attempt (h). If 'a' commits were to fix up what 'j'
started, presumably Alice already studied and knows enough about
the problem so she should be able to make an informed decision
to pick between what 'j+a' and 'h' do.
A lot worse case is if Alice's work is not at all related to
what 'j' wanted to do (she did not mean to pick up from where I
left off -- she just wanted to work on something different).
Then she would not be familiar enough with what 'j' and 'h'
tried to achieve, and I'd be forcing her to pick between the
two. Of course if she can make the right decision, then again
that is a perfect example of distributed collaboration, but that
does not change the fact that I'd be forcing her to clean up my
mess.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
honor GIT_REFLOG_ACTION in git-commit
This allows git-cherry-pick and git-revert to properly identify
themselves in the resulting reflog entries. Earlier they were
recorded as what git-commit has done.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
This allows git-cherry-pick and git-revert to properly identify
themselves in the resulting reflog entries. Earlier they were
recorded as what git-commit has done.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
fix reflog entries for "git-branch"
Even when -l is not given from the command line, the repository
may have the configuration variable core.logallrefupdates set,
or an old-timer might have done ": >.git/logs/refs/heads/new"
before running "git branch new". In these cases, the code gave
an uninitialized msg[] from the stack to be written out as the
reflog message.
This also passes a different message when '-f' option is used.
Saying "git branch -f branch some-commit" is a moral equilvalent
of doing "git-reset some-commit" while on the branch.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Even when -l is not given from the command line, the repository
may have the configuration variable core.logallrefupdates set,
or an old-timer might have done ": >.git/logs/refs/heads/new"
before running "git branch new". In these cases, the code gave
an uninitialized msg[] from the stack to be written out as the
reflog message.
This also passes a different message when '-f' option is used.
Saying "git branch -f branch some-commit" is a moral equilvalent
of doing "git-reset some-commit" while on the branch.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
scan reflogs independently from refs
Currently, the search for all reflogs depends on the existence of
corresponding refs under the .git/refs/ directory. Let's scan the
.git/logs/ directory directly instead.
Signed-off-by: Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Currently, the search for all reflogs depends on the existence of
corresponding refs under the .git/refs/ directory. Let's scan the
.git/logs/ directory directly instead.
Signed-off-by: Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
core-tutorial: http reference link fix
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Tutorial-2: Adjust git-status output to recent reality.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Tutorial: fix asciidoc formatting of "git add" section.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Don't leak file descriptors from unavailable pack files.
If open_packed_git failed it may have been because the packfile
actually exists and is readable, but some sort of verification
did not pass. In this case open_packed_git left pack_fd filled
in, as the file descriptor is valid. We don't want to leak the
file descriptor, nor do we want to allow someone in the future
to use this packed_git.
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
If open_packed_git failed it may have been because the packfile
actually exists and is readable, but some sort of verification
did not pass. In this case open_packed_git left pack_fd filled
in, as the file descriptor is valid. We don't want to leak the
file descriptor, nor do we want to allow someone in the future
to use this packed_git.
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
doc: hooks.txt said post-commit default sends an email, it doesn't
The default post-commit hook is actually empty; it is the update hook
that sends an email. This patch corrects hooks.txt to reflect that.
Signed-off-by: Andy Parkins <andyparkins@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
The default post-commit hook is actually empty; it is the update hook
that sends an email. This patch corrects hooks.txt to reflect that.
Signed-off-by: Andy Parkins <andyparkins@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Disallow invalid --pretty= abbreviations
--pretty=o is a valid abbreviation, --pretty=omfg is not
Noticed by: Nicolas Vilz
Signed-off-by: Eric Wong <normalperson@yhbt.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
--pretty=o is a valid abbreviation, --pretty=omfg is not
Noticed by: Nicolas Vilz
Signed-off-by: Eric Wong <normalperson@yhbt.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Fix some documentation typos and grammar
Also suggest user manual mention .gitignore.
Signed-off-by: Michael Coleman <tutufan@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Also suggest user manual mention .gitignore.
Signed-off-by: Michael Coleman <tutufan@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Don't find objects in packs which aren't available anymore.
Matthias Lederhofer identified a race condition where a Git reader
process was able to locate an object in a packed_git index, but
was then preempted while a `git repack -a -d` ran and completed.
By the time the reader was able to seek in the packfile to get the
object data, the packfile no longer existed on disk.
In this particular case the reader process did not attempt to
open the packfile before it was deleted, so it did not already
have the pack_fd field popuplated. With the packfile itself gone,
there was no way for the reader to open it and fetch the data.
I'm fixing the race condition by teaching find_pack_entry to ignore
a packed_git whose packfile is not currently open and which cannot
be opened. If none of the currently known packs can supply the
object, we will return 0 and the caller will decide the object is
not available. If this is the first attempt at finding an object,
the caller will reprepare_packed_git and try again. If it was
the second attempt, the caller will typically return NULL back,
and an error message about a missing object will be reported.
This patch does not address the situation of a reader which is
being starved out by a tight sequence of `git repack -a -d` runs.
In this particular case the reader will try twice, probably fail
both times, and declare the object in question cannot be found.
As it is highly unlikely that a real world `git repack -a -d` can
complete faster than a reader can open a packfile, so I don't think
this is a huge concern.
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Matthias Lederhofer identified a race condition where a Git reader
process was able to locate an object in a packed_git index, but
was then preempted while a `git repack -a -d` ran and completed.
By the time the reader was able to seek in the packfile to get the
object data, the packfile no longer existed on disk.
In this particular case the reader process did not attempt to
open the packfile before it was deleted, so it did not already
have the pack_fd field popuplated. With the packfile itself gone,
there was no way for the reader to open it and fetch the data.
I'm fixing the race condition by teaching find_pack_entry to ignore
a packed_git whose packfile is not currently open and which cannot
be opened. If none of the currently known packs can supply the
object, we will return 0 and the caller will decide the object is
not available. If this is the first attempt at finding an object,
the caller will reprepare_packed_git and try again. If it was
the second attempt, the caller will typically return NULL back,
and an error message about a missing object will be reported.
This patch does not address the situation of a reader which is
being starved out by a tight sequence of `git repack -a -d` runs.
In this particular case the reader will try twice, probably fail
both times, and declare the object in question cannot be found.
As it is highly unlikely that a real world `git repack -a -d` can
complete faster than a reader can open a packfile, so I don't think
this is a huge concern.
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Refactor open_packed_git to return an error code.
Because I want to reuse open_packed_git in a context where I don't
want the process to die if the packfile in question is bogus, I'm
changing its behavior to return error("...") rather than die("...")
when it detects something is wrong with the packfile it was given.
Right now we still must die out of use_pack should open_packed_git
fail, as none of use_pack's callers are prepared to handle a failure
from that function.
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Because I want to reuse open_packed_git in a context where I don't
want the process to die if the packfile in question is bogus, I'm
changing its behavior to return error("...") rather than die("...")
when it detects something is wrong with the packfile it was given.
Right now we still must die out of use_pack should open_packed_git
fail, as none of use_pack's callers are prepared to handle a failure
from that function.
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Correct comment in prepare_packed_git_one.
After staring at the comment and the associated for loop, I
realized the comment was completely bogus. The section of
code its talking about is trying to avoid duplicate mapping
of the same packfile.
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
After staring at the comment and the associated for loop, I
realized the comment was completely bogus. The section of
code its talking about is trying to avoid duplicate mapping
of the same packfile.
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Cleanup prepare_packed_git_one to reuse install_packed_git.
There is little point in having the linked list insertion code
appearing in install_packed_git, and then again just 30 lines
further down in the same file.
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
There is little point in having the linked list insertion code
appearing in install_packed_git, and then again just 30 lines
further down in the same file.
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Teach 'git remote' how to cleanup stale tracking branches.
Since it can be annoying to manually cleanup 40 tracking branches
which were removed by the remote system, 'git remote prune <n>'
can now be used to delete any tracking branches under <n> which
are no longer available on the remote system.
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Since it can be annoying to manually cleanup 40 tracking branches
which were removed by the remote system, 'git remote prune <n>'
can now be used to delete any tracking branches under <n> which
are no longer available on the remote system.
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Pull out remote listing functions in git-remote.
I want to reuse the stale branch detection to implement a new
'git remote prune' subcommand. Easiest way to do that is to use
the same logic that 'git remote show' uses to determine the stale
tracking branches, then delete those.
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
I want to reuse the stale branch detection to implement a new
'git remote prune' subcommand. Easiest way to do that is to use
the same logic that 'git remote show' uses to determine the stale
tracking branches, then delete those.
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
git-svn: do not let Git.pm warn if we prematurely close pipes
This mainly quiets down warnings when running git svn log.
Signed-off-by: Eric Wong <normalperson@yhbt.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
This mainly quiets down warnings when running git svn log.
Signed-off-by: Eric Wong <normalperson@yhbt.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Update the documentation for the new '@{...}' syntax
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Teach the '@{...}' notation to git-log -g
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
provide a nice @{...} syntax to always mean the current branch reflog
This is shorter than HEAD@{...} and being nameless it has no semantic
issues.
Signed-off-by: Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
This is shorter than HEAD@{...} and being nameless it has no semantic
issues.
Signed-off-by: Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
prevent HEAD reflog to be interpreted as current branch reflog
The work in progress to enable separate reflog for HEAD will make it
independent from reflog of any branch HEAD might be pointing to. In
the mean time disallow HEAD@{...} until that work is completed. Otherwise
people might get used to the current behavior which makes HEAD@{...} an
alias for <current_branch>@{...} which won't be the case later.
Signed-off-by: Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
The work in progress to enable separate reflog for HEAD will make it
independent from reflog of any branch HEAD might be pointing to. In
the mean time disallow HEAD@{...} until that work is completed. Otherwise
people might get used to the current behavior which makes HEAD@{...} an
alias for <current_branch>@{...} which won't be the case later.
Signed-off-by: Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Use "git checkout -q" in git-bisect
Converts one use of git-checkout in git-bisect not to say "switching
to branch". It looks like all the other cases it is friendlier to
give notice to the end user.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Converts one use of git-checkout in git-bisect not to say "switching
to branch". It looks like all the other cases it is friendlier to
give notice to the end user.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
add a quiet option to git-checkout
Those new messages are certainly nice, but there might be cases where
they are simply unwelcome, like when git-commit is used within scripts.
Signed-off-by: Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Those new messages are certainly nice, but there might be cases where
they are simply unwelcome, like when git-commit is used within scripts.
Signed-off-by: Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
reword the detached head message a little again
Seems clearer this way, to me at least.
Signed-off-by: Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Seems clearer this way, to me at least.
Signed-off-by: Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
detached HEAD -- finishing touches
This updates "git-checkout" to report which branch you are
switching to. Especially for people who do not use __git_ps1
from contrib/completion/git-completion.bash this would give a
friendlier feedback of what is going on, and should make the
reminder message much less scary.
Here is a sample session (the prompt tells which branch I am on).
* I have some local modification and realize that the change deserves
to be on its own new topic branch.
[git.git (master)]$ git diff --stat
git-checkout.sh | 10 ++++++++--
1 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
* So I switch to a new branch. I get a listing of local modifications
and assuring "Switched to a new branch" message.
[git.git (master)]$ git checkout -b jc/checkout
M git-checkout.sh
Switched to a new branch "jc/checkout"
* If I switch back to "master", I get essentially the same.
[git.git (jc/checkout)]$ git checkout master
M git-checkout.sh
Switched to branch "master"
* Detaching head would say which commit I am at and reminds me that
I am not on any branch (not that I would detach my HEAD while keeping
precious local changes around in any real-world workflow -- this is
just a sample session).
[git.git (master)]$ git checkout master^
M git-checkout.sh
Note: you are not on any branch and are at commit "master^"
If you want to create a new branch from this checkout, you may do so
(now or later) by using -b with the checkout command again. Example:
git checkout -b <new_branch_name>
* Coming back to an attached state can lose the detached HEAD, so
I get warned and stopped.
[git.git]$ git checkout master
You are not on any branch and switching to branch 'master'
may lose your changes. At this point, you can do one of two things:
(1) Decide it is Ok and say 'git checkout -f master';
(2) Start a new branch from the current commit, by saying
'git checkout -b <branch-name>'.
Leaving your HEAD detached; not switching to branch 'master'.
* Moving around while my HEAD is detached is Ok. I still get the list
of local modifications.
[git.git]$ git checkout master^0
M git-checkout.sh
* The previous step that switched to the tip commit is an obscure but
useful trick. My HEAD is still detached but now it is pointed at by
an existing ref, so I can come back safely.
[git.git]$ git checkout master
M git-checkout.sh
Switched to branch "master"
* And we are back on the "master" branch.
[git.git (master)]$ exit
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
This updates "git-checkout" to report which branch you are
switching to. Especially for people who do not use __git_ps1
from contrib/completion/git-completion.bash this would give a
friendlier feedback of what is going on, and should make the
reminder message much less scary.
Here is a sample session (the prompt tells which branch I am on).
* I have some local modification and realize that the change deserves
to be on its own new topic branch.
[git.git (master)]$ git diff --stat
git-checkout.sh | 10 ++++++++--
1 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
* So I switch to a new branch. I get a listing of local modifications
and assuring "Switched to a new branch" message.
[git.git (master)]$ git checkout -b jc/checkout
M git-checkout.sh
Switched to a new branch "jc/checkout"
* If I switch back to "master", I get essentially the same.
[git.git (jc/checkout)]$ git checkout master
M git-checkout.sh
Switched to branch "master"
* Detaching head would say which commit I am at and reminds me that
I am not on any branch (not that I would detach my HEAD while keeping
precious local changes around in any real-world workflow -- this is
just a sample session).
[git.git (master)]$ git checkout master^
M git-checkout.sh
Note: you are not on any branch and are at commit "master^"
If you want to create a new branch from this checkout, you may do so
(now or later) by using -b with the checkout command again. Example:
git checkout -b <new_branch_name>
* Coming back to an attached state can lose the detached HEAD, so
I get warned and stopped.
[git.git]$ git checkout master
You are not on any branch and switching to branch 'master'
may lose your changes. At this point, you can do one of two things:
(1) Decide it is Ok and say 'git checkout -f master';
(2) Start a new branch from the current commit, by saying
'git checkout -b <branch-name>'.
Leaving your HEAD detached; not switching to branch 'master'.
* Moving around while my HEAD is detached is Ok. I still get the list
of local modifications.
[git.git]$ git checkout master^0
M git-checkout.sh
* The previous step that switched to the tip commit is an obscure but
useful trick. My HEAD is still detached but now it is pointed at by
an existing ref, so I can come back safely.
[git.git]$ git checkout master
M git-checkout.sh
Switched to branch "master"
* And we are back on the "master" branch.
[git.git (master)]$ exit
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
GIT v1.5.0-rc3
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Do not use hardcoded path to xhmtl.xsl to generate user's manual
It does not seem to need it either and gives an error on FC5 I use
at kernel.org to cut documentation tarballs, so remove it in the
meantime.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
It does not seem to need it either and gives an error on FC5 I use
at kernel.org to cut documentation tarballs, so remove it in the
meantime.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
git main documentation: point at the user's manual.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Merge branch 'master' of git://linux-nfs.org/~bfields/git
This is in the hope of giving JBF's user-manual wider exposure.
I am not very happy with trailing whitespaces in the new
document, but let's not worry too much about the formatting
issues for now, but concentrate more on the structure and the
contents.
This is in the hope of giving JBF's user-manual wider exposure.
I am not very happy with trailing whitespaces in the new
document, but let's not worry too much about the formatting
issues for now, but concentrate more on the structure and the
contents.
t9200: do not test -x bit if the filesystem does not support it.
The last test in t9200 wants to see if executable bit is
retained, which has no chance of succeeding on a filesystem that
does not handle executable bit correctly.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
The last test in t9200 wants to see if executable bit is
retained, which has no chance of succeeding on a filesystem that
does not handle executable bit correctly.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
t9200: Re-code non-ascii path test in UTF-8
For the purpose of this test we do not really care if the paths
are in latin-1, but people on Cygwin seem to be having problem
on foreign-looking pathnames that do not play well with their
locale.
Let's try to re-code them in UTF-8 and see who screams,
thanks, or reports no-improvements.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
For the purpose of this test we do not really care if the paths
are in latin-1, but people on Cygwin seem to be having problem
on foreign-looking pathnames that do not play well with their
locale.
Let's try to re-code them in UTF-8 and see who screams,
thanks, or reports no-improvements.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Update git-cat-file documentation
Signed-off-by: Aneesh Kumar K.V <aneesh.kumar@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Signed-off-by: Aneesh Kumar K.V <aneesh.kumar@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Documentation: "git-checkout <tree> <path>" takes any tree-ish
Especially, it is not limited to branch.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Especially, it is not limited to branch.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Improved error message from git-rebase
If the index wasn't clean, git-rebase would simply show the output from
git-diff-index with no further comment to the user.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
If the index wasn't clean, git-rebase would simply show the output from
git-diff-index with no further comment to the user.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Fix git-update-index to work with relative pathnames.
In particular, it fixes the following (typical for cygwin) problem:
$ git-update-index --chmod=-x ../wrapper/Jamfile
fatal: git-update-index: cannot chmod -x '../wrapper/Jamfile'
Signed-off-by: Alex Riesen <raa.lkml@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
In particular, it fixes the following (typical for cygwin) problem:
$ git-update-index --chmod=-x ../wrapper/Jamfile
fatal: git-update-index: cannot chmod -x '../wrapper/Jamfile'
Signed-off-by: Alex Riesen <raa.lkml@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Escape --upload-pack from expr.
Recent commit ae1dffcb28ee89a23f8d2747be65e17c8eab1690 by Junio
changed the way --upload-pack was passed around between clone,
fetch and ls-remote and modified the handling of the command
line parameter parsing.
Unfortunately FreeBSD 6.1 insists that the expression
expr --upload-pack=git-upload-pack : '-[^=]*=\(.*\)'
is illegal, as the --upload-pack option is not supported by their
implementation of expr.
Elsewhere in Git we use z as a leading prefix of both arguments,
ensuring the -- isn't seen by expr.
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Recent commit ae1dffcb28ee89a23f8d2747be65e17c8eab1690 by Junio
changed the way --upload-pack was passed around between clone,
fetch and ls-remote and modified the handling of the command
line parameter parsing.
Unfortunately FreeBSD 6.1 insists that the expression
expr --upload-pack=git-upload-pack : '-[^=]*=\(.*\)'
is illegal, as the --upload-pack option is not supported by their
implementation of expr.
Elsewhere in Git we use z as a leading prefix of both arguments,
ensuring the -- isn't seen by expr.
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Don't coredump on bad refs in update-server-info.
Apparently if we are unable to parse an object update-server-info
coredumps, as it doesn't bother to check the return value of its
call to parse_object.
Instead of coredumping, skip the ref.
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Apparently if we are unable to parse an object update-server-info
coredumps, as it doesn't bother to check the return value of its
call to parse_object.
Instead of coredumping, skip the ref.
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
tone down the detached head warning
This is not meant to frighten people or even to suggest they might be
doing something wrong, but rather to notify them of a state change and
provide a likely option in the case this state was entered by mistake.
Signed-off-by: Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
This is not meant to frighten people or even to suggest they might be
doing something wrong, but rather to notify them of a state change and
provide a likely option in the case this state was entered by mistake.
Signed-off-by: Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Fix git-tag -u
... which I broke when we introduced user.signingkey configuration.
There was no reason to add a new variable keyid to the script.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
... which I broke when we introduced user.signingkey configuration.
There was no reason to add a new variable keyid to the script.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
user-manual: todo's
Update todo's.
Signed-off-by: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@citi.umich.edu>
Update todo's.
Signed-off-by: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@citi.umich.edu>
user-manual: point to README for gitweb information
I'd like complete gitweb setup instructions some day, but for now just
refer to the gitweb README.
Signed-off-by: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@citi.umich.edu>
I'd like complete gitweb setup instructions some day, but for now just
refer to the gitweb README.
Signed-off-by: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@citi.umich.edu>
blameview: Use git-cat-file to read the file content.
Fix blameview to use git-cat-file to read the file content.
This make sure we show the right content when we have modified
file in the working directory which is not committed.
Signed-off-by: Aneesh Kumar K.V <aneesh.kumar@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Fix blameview to use git-cat-file to read the file content.
This make sure we show the right content when we have modified
file in the working directory which is not committed.
Signed-off-by: Aneesh Kumar K.V <aneesh.kumar@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
git-fetch: Allow fetching the remote HEAD
... with:
$ git fetch ${remote} HEAD
Also
$ git fetch ${remote} :${localref}
worked, but
$ git fetch ${remote} HEAD:{localref}
didn't. Now both are equivalent.
Signed-off-by: Santi Béjar <sbejar@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
... with:
$ git fetch ${remote} HEAD
Also
$ git fetch ${remote} :${localref}
worked, but
$ git fetch ${remote} HEAD:{localref}
didn't. Now both are equivalent.
Signed-off-by: Santi Béjar <sbejar@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
git-send-email: remove debugging output.
rfc2047 unquoter spitted out an annoying "- unquoted" which was
added during debugging but I forgot to remove.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
rfc2047 unquoter spitted out an annoying "- unquoted" which was
added during debugging but I forgot to remove.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Add a missing fork() error check.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
git-blame: somewhat better commenting.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Make fsck and fsck-objects be builtins.
The earlier change df391b192 to rename fsck-objects to fsck broke
fsck-objects. This should fix it again.
Signed-off-by: Mark Wooding <mdw@distorted.org.uk>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
The earlier change df391b192 to rename fsck-objects to fsck broke
fsck-objects. This should fix it again.
Signed-off-by: Mark Wooding <mdw@distorted.org.uk>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
git-commit -s: no extra space when sign-offs appear at the end already.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Replace perl code with pure shell code
Signed-off-by: Simon 'corecode' Schubert <corecode@fs.ei.tum.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Signed-off-by: Simon 'corecode' Schubert <corecode@fs.ei.tum.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
lock_any_ref_for_update(): do not accept malformatted refs.
We used to use lock_any_ref_for_update() because the command
needs to also update HEAD (which is not under refs/, so
lock_ref_sha1() cannot be used). The function however did not
check for refs with illegal characters in them.
Use check_ref_format() to catch malformed refs. For this check,
we specifically do not want to say having less than two levels
in the name is illegal to allow HEAD (and perhaps other special
refs in the future).
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
We used to use lock_any_ref_for_update() because the command
needs to also update HEAD (which is not under refs/, so
lock_ref_sha1() cannot be used). The function however did not
check for refs with illegal characters in them.
Use check_ref_format() to catch malformed refs. For this check,
we specifically do not want to say having less than two levels
in the name is illegal to allow HEAD (and perhaps other special
refs in the future).
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Two small typofixes.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
user-manual: SHA1 -> object name
Prefer "object name" to SHA1, at least in higher level documentation.
Signed-off-by: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@citi.umich.edu>
Prefer "object name" to SHA1, at least in higher level documentation.
Signed-off-by: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@citi.umich.edu>
user-manual: document git-show-branch example
Document Junio's show-branch trick for finding out which tags are
descendents of a given comit.
Signed-off-by: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@citi.umich.edu>
Document Junio's show-branch trick for finding out which tags are
descendents of a given comit.
Signed-off-by: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@citi.umich.edu>
user-manual: minor "TODO" updates
I still really want a section on interoperability with CVS, subversion,
etc., but I'm not getting around to it very fast, so just add this to
the TODO section for now. And a few other minor todo updates.
Signed-off-by: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@citi.umich.edu>
I still really want a section on interoperability with CVS, subversion,
etc., but I'm not getting around to it very fast, so just add this to
the TODO section for now. And a few other minor todo updates.
Signed-off-by: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@citi.umich.edu>
user-manual: rewrap a few long lines
Rewrap some long lines.
Signed-off-by: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@citi.umich.edu>
Rewrap some long lines.
Signed-off-by: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@citi.umich.edu>
user-manual: reflogs, other recovery
Add a brief discussion of reflogs. Also recovery of dangling commits
seems to fit in here, so move some of the discussion out of Linus's
email to here.
Signed-off-by: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@citi.umich.edu>
Add a brief discussion of reflogs. Also recovery of dangling commits
seems to fit in here, so move some of the discussion out of Linus's
email to here.
Signed-off-by: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@citi.umich.edu>
user-manual: fix a header level
Oops.
Signed-off-by: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@citi.umich.edu>
Oops.
Signed-off-by: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@citi.umich.edu>
user-manual: typo fix
Oops
Signed-off-by: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@citi.umich.edu>
Oops
Signed-off-by: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@citi.umich.edu>
user-manual: add references to git-config man page
Direct editing of config files may be more natural for users than using
the git-config commandline; but we should still reference the
git-config man page when we describe such editing, so people know where
to go for details on the config file syntax and meanings of the
variables.
Signed-off-by: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@citi.umich.edu>
Direct editing of config files may be more natural for users than using
the git-config commandline; but we should still reference the
git-config man page when we describe such editing, so people know where
to go for details on the config file syntax and meanings of the
variables.
Signed-off-by: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@citi.umich.edu>
user-manual: repo-config -> config
Looks like we're going to allow git-config as the preferred alias to
git-repo-config, so let's document that instead.
Signed-off-by: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@citi.umich.edu>
Looks like we're going to allow git-config as the preferred alias to
git-repo-config, so let's document that instead.
Signed-off-by: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@citi.umich.edu>
user-manual: fsck-objects -> fsck
There seems to be an agreement to rename fsck-objects to fsck.
Signed-off-by: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@citi.umich.edu>
There seems to be an agreement to rename fsck-objects to fsck.
Signed-off-by: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@citi.umich.edu>
user-manual: git-fsck, dangling objects
Initial import of fsck and dangling objects discussion, mostly lifted from
an email from Linus.
Signed-off-by: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@citi.umich.edu>
Initial import of fsck and dangling objects discussion, mostly lifted from
an email from Linus.
Signed-off-by: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@citi.umich.edu>
git-fsck-objects is now synonym to git-fsck
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
[PATCH] Rename git-repo-config to git-config.
Signed-off-by: Tom Prince <tom.prince@ualberta.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Signed-off-by: Tom Prince <tom.prince@ualberta.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Heavily expanded update hook to send more useful emails than the old hook
I know it's only an example, but having this might save someone else the
trouble of writing an enhanced version for themselves.
It basically does the same job as the old update hook, but with these
differences:
* The recipients list is read from the repository config file from
hooks.mailinglist
* Updating unannotated tags can be allowed by setting
hooks.allowunannotated
* Announcement emails (via annotated tag creation) can be sent to a
different mailing list by setting hooks.announcelist
* Output email is more verbose and generates specific content depending
on whether the ref is a tag, an annotated tag, a branch, or a
tracking branch
* The email is easier to filter; the subject line is prefixed with
[SCM] and a project description pulled from the "description" file
* It catches (and displays differently) branch updates that are
performed with a --force
Obviously, it's nothing that clever - it's the update hook I use on my
repositories but I've tried to keep it general, and tried to make the
output always relevant to the type of update.
Signed-off-by: Andy Parkins <andyparkins@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
I know it's only an example, but having this might save someone else the
trouble of writing an enhanced version for themselves.
It basically does the same job as the old update hook, but with these
differences:
* The recipients list is read from the repository config file from
hooks.mailinglist
* Updating unannotated tags can be allowed by setting
hooks.allowunannotated
* Announcement emails (via annotated tag creation) can be sent to a
different mailing list by setting hooks.announcelist
* Output email is more verbose and generates specific content depending
on whether the ref is a tag, an annotated tag, a branch, or a
tracking branch
* The email is easier to filter; the subject line is prefixed with
[SCM] and a project description pulled from the "description" file
* It catches (and displays differently) branch updates that are
performed with a --force
Obviously, it's nothing that clever - it's the update hook I use on my
repositories but I've tried to keep it general, and tried to make the
output always relevant to the type of update.
Signed-off-by: Andy Parkins <andyparkins@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
UNIX reference time of 1970-01-01 00:00 is UTC timezone, not local time zone
I got bitten because in the UK (where one would expect 1970-01-01 00:00
to be UTC 0) some politicians decided to mess around with daylight
savings time from 1968 to 1971; it was permanently BST (+0100). That
means that on my computer the following is true:
$ date --date="1970-01-01 00:00" +"%F %T %z (%Z)"
1970-01-01 00:00:00 +0100 (BST)
This of course means that the --date argument to date is specified in
local time, not UTC. So when the hooks--update script does this:
date=$(date --date="1970-01-01 00:00:00 $ts seconds")
It's actually saying (in my timezone) "1970-01-01 01:00:00 UTC" + $ts.
Clearly this is wrong. The UNIX epoch started at midnight UTC not 1am
UTC.
This leads to the tagged time in hooks--update being shown as one hour
earlier than the true tagged time (in my timezone). The problem would
be worse for other timezones. For a +1300 timezone on 1970-01-01, the
tagged time would be 13 hours earlier. Oops.
The solution is to force the reference time to UTC, which is what this
patch does. In my timezone:
$ date --date="1970-01-01 00:00 +0000" +"%F %T %z (%Z)"
1970-01-01 01:00:00 +0100 (BST)
Much better.
Signed-off-by: Andy Parkins <andyparkins@gmail.com>
I got bitten because in the UK (where one would expect 1970-01-01 00:00
to be UTC 0) some politicians decided to mess around with daylight
savings time from 1968 to 1971; it was permanently BST (+0100). That
means that on my computer the following is true:
$ date --date="1970-01-01 00:00" +"%F %T %z (%Z)"
1970-01-01 00:00:00 +0100 (BST)
This of course means that the --date argument to date is specified in
local time, not UTC. So when the hooks--update script does this:
date=$(date --date="1970-01-01 00:00:00 $ts seconds")
It's actually saying (in my timezone) "1970-01-01 01:00:00 UTC" + $ts.
Clearly this is wrong. The UNIX epoch started at midnight UTC not 1am
UTC.
This leads to the tagged time in hooks--update being shown as one hour
earlier than the true tagged time (in my timezone). The problem would
be worse for other timezones. For a +1300 timezone on 1970-01-01, the
tagged time would be 13 hours earlier. Oops.
The solution is to force the reference time to UTC, which is what this
patch does. In my timezone:
$ date --date="1970-01-01 00:00 +0000" +"%F %T %z (%Z)"
1970-01-01 01:00:00 +0100 (BST)
Much better.
Signed-off-by: Andy Parkins <andyparkins@gmail.com>
Teach for-each-ref about a little language called Tcl.
Love it or hate it, some people actually still program in Tcl. Some
of those programs are meant for interfacing with Git. Programs such as
gitk and git-gui. It may be useful to have Tcl-safe output available
from for-each-ref, just like shell, Perl and Python already enjoy.
Thanks to Sergey Vlasov for pointing out the horrible flaws in the
first and second version of this patch, and steering me in the right
direction for Tcl value quoting.
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Love it or hate it, some people actually still program in Tcl. Some
of those programs are meant for interfacing with Git. Programs such as
gitk and git-gui. It may be useful to have Tcl-safe output available
from for-each-ref, just like shell, Perl and Python already enjoy.
Thanks to Sergey Vlasov for pointing out the horrible flaws in the
first and second version of this patch, and steering me in the right
direction for Tcl value quoting.
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Add a sample program 'blameview' to show how to use git-blame --incremental
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
git-push through git protocol
This allows pushing over the git:// protocol, and while it's not
authenticated, it could make sense from within a firewalled
setup where nobody but trusted internal people can reach the git
port. git-daemon is possibly easier and faster to set up in the
kind of situation where you set up git instead of CVS inside a
company.
"git-receive-pack" is disabled by default, so you need to enable it
explicitly by starting git-daemon with the "--enable=receive-pack"
command line argument, or by having your config enable it automatically.
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
This allows pushing over the git:// protocol, and while it's not
authenticated, it could make sense from within a firewalled
setup where nobody but trusted internal people can reach the git
port. git-daemon is possibly easier and faster to set up in the
kind of situation where you set up git instead of CVS inside a
company.
"git-receive-pack" is disabled by default, so you need to enable it
explicitly by starting git-daemon with the "--enable=receive-pack"
command line argument, or by having your config enable it automatically.
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Document 'git-blame --incremental'
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Documentation/config.txt: Fix documentation of colour config tweaks.
* The description of valid colour specifications was rather
incomplete, so fix it so that it actually describes colour specs as
accepted by color_parse().
* The list of colour items allowed in color.diff.BLAH was missing the
`commit' and `whitespace' entries.
Signed-off-by: Mark Wooding <mdw@distorted.org.uk>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
* The description of valid colour specifications was rather
incomplete, so fix it so that it actually describes colour specs as
accepted by color_parse().
* The list of colour items allowed in color.diff.BLAH was missing the
`commit' and `whitespace' entries.
Signed-off-by: Mark Wooding <mdw@distorted.org.uk>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
wt-status: Actually accept `color.status.BLAH' configuration variables.
A stupid typo stopped this from working.
Signed-off-by: Mark Wooding <mdw@distorted.org.uk>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
A stupid typo stopped this from working.
Signed-off-by: Mark Wooding <mdw@distorted.org.uk>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
git-blame --incremental: don't use pager
Starting a pager defeats the purpose of the incremental output
mode. This changes git-blame to only paginate if --incremental
was not given.
git -p blame --incremental still starts the pager, though.
Signed-off-by: Rene Scharfe <rene.scharfe@lsrfire.ath.cx>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Starting a pager defeats the purpose of the incremental output
mode. This changes git-blame to only paginate if --incremental
was not given.
git -p blame --incremental still starts the pager, though.
Signed-off-by: Rene Scharfe <rene.scharfe@lsrfire.ath.cx>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
add reflog when moving HEAD to a new branch
Signed-off-by: Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Signed-off-by: Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
create_symref(): do not assume pathname from git_path() persists long enough
Being lazy to rely on the cycling N buffers mkpath() and friends
return is nice in general, but it makes it too easy to introduce
new bugs that are "mysterious".
Introduction of read_ref() in create_symref() after calling
git_path() to get the git_HEAD value (i.e. the path to create a
new symref at) consumed more than the available buffers and
broke a later call to mkpath() that derives lockpath from it.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Being lazy to rely on the cycling N buffers mkpath() and friends
return is nice in general, but it makes it too easy to introduce
new bugs that are "mysterious".
Introduction of read_ref() in create_symref() after calling
git_path() to get the git_HEAD value (i.e. the path to create a
new symref at) consumed more than the available buffers and
broke a later call to mkpath() that derives lockpath from it.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
add logref support to git-symbolic-ref
Signed-off-by: Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Signed-off-by: Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
move create_symref() past log_ref_write()
This doesn't change the code at all. It is done to make the next patch
more obvious.
Signed-off-by: Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
This doesn't change the code at all. It is done to make the next patch
more obvious.
Signed-off-by: Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
add reflog entries for HEAD when detached
Signed-off-by: Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Signed-off-by: Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
enable separate reflog for HEAD
If HEAD is tied to a branch then both logs/HEAD and logs/heads/<branch> are
updated. This is also true for any symbolic refs in general, but only HEAD
will see its reflog created automatically.
Signed-off-by: Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
If HEAD is tied to a branch then both logs/HEAD and logs/heads/<branch> are
updated. This is also true for any symbolic refs in general, but only HEAD
will see its reflog created automatically.
Signed-off-by: Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
lock_ref_sha1_basic(): remember the original name of a ref when resolving it
A ref might be pointing to another ref but only the name of the last ref
is remembered. Let's remember about the first name as well.
Signed-off-by: Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
A ref might be pointing to another ref but only the name of the last ref
is remembered. Let's remember about the first name as well.
Signed-off-by: Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
make reflog filename independent from struct ref_lock
This allows for ref_log_write() to be used in a more flexible way,
and is needed for future changes.
This is only code reorg with no behavior change.
Signed-off-by: Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
This allows for ref_log_write() to be used in a more flexible way,
and is needed for future changes.
This is only code reorg with no behavior change.
Signed-off-by: Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Compute accurate distances in git-describe before output.
My prior change to git-describe attempts to print the distance
between the input commit and the best matching tag, but this distance
was usually only an estimate as we always aborted revision walking
as soon as we overflowed the configured limit on the number of
possible tags (as set by --candidates).
Displaying an estimated distance is not very useful and can just be
downright confusing. Most users (heck, most Git developers) don't
immediately understand why this distance differs from the output
of common tools such as `git rev-list | wc -l`. Even worse, the
estimated distance could change in the future (including decreasing
despite no rebase occuring) if we find more possible tags earlier
on during traversal. (This could happen if more tags are merged
into the branch between queries.) These factors basically make an
estimated distance useless.
Fortunately we are usually most of the way through an accurate
distance computation by the time we abort (due to reaching the
current --candidates limit). This means we can simply finish
counting out the revisions still in our commit queue to present
the accurate distance at the end. The number of commits remaining
in the commit queue is probably less than the number of commits
already traversed, so finishing out the count is not likely to take
very long. This final distance will then always match the output of
`git rev-list | wc -l`.
We can easily reduce the total number of commits that need to be
walked at the end by stopping as soon as all of the commits in the
commit queue are flagged as being merged into the already selected
best possible tag. If that's true then there are no remaining
unseen commits which can contribute to our best possible tag's
depth counter, so further traversal is useless.
Basic testing on my Mac OS X system shows there is no noticable
performance difference between this accurate distance counting
version of git-describe and the prior version of git-describe,
at least when run on git.git.
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
My prior change to git-describe attempts to print the distance
between the input commit and the best matching tag, but this distance
was usually only an estimate as we always aborted revision walking
as soon as we overflowed the configured limit on the number of
possible tags (as set by --candidates).
Displaying an estimated distance is not very useful and can just be
downright confusing. Most users (heck, most Git developers) don't
immediately understand why this distance differs from the output
of common tools such as `git rev-list | wc -l`. Even worse, the
estimated distance could change in the future (including decreasing
despite no rebase occuring) if we find more possible tags earlier
on during traversal. (This could happen if more tags are merged
into the branch between queries.) These factors basically make an
estimated distance useless.
Fortunately we are usually most of the way through an accurate
distance computation by the time we abort (due to reaching the
current --candidates limit). This means we can simply finish
counting out the revisions still in our commit queue to present
the accurate distance at the end. The number of commits remaining
in the commit queue is probably less than the number of commits
already traversed, so finishing out the count is not likely to take
very long. This final distance will then always match the output of
`git rev-list | wc -l`.
We can easily reduce the total number of commits that need to be
walked at the end by stopping as soon as all of the commits in the
commit queue are flagged as being merged into the already selected
best possible tag. If that's true then there are no remaining
unseen commits which can contribute to our best possible tag's
depth counter, so further traversal is useless.
Basic testing on my Mac OS X system shows there is no noticable
performance difference between this accurate distance counting
version of git-describe and the prior version of git-describe,
at least when run on git.git.
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Update describe documentation.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Teach git-describe to display distances from tags.
If you get two different describes at different
times from a non-rewinding branch and they both come up with the same
tag name, you can tell which is the 'newer' one by distance. This is
rather common in practice, so its incredibly useful.
[jc: still needs documentation and fixups when traversal gives up
early.]
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
If you get two different describes at different
times from a non-rewinding branch and they both come up with the same
tag name, you can tell which is the 'newer' one by distance. This is
rather common in practice, so its incredibly useful.
[jc: still needs documentation and fixups when traversal gives up
early.]
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
git-blame --porcelain: quote filename in c-style when needed.
Otherwise a pathname that has funny characters such as LF would
screw up the parsing programs of the output.
Strictly speaking, this is not backward compatible, but the
current output for pathnames that have embedded LF and such
cannot be sanely parsed anyway, and pathnames that only use
characters from the portable pathname character set won't be
affected.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Otherwise a pathname that has funny characters such as LF would
screw up the parsing programs of the output.
Strictly speaking, this is not backward compatible, but the
current output for pathnames that have embedded LF and such
cannot be sanely parsed anyway, and pathnames that only use
characters from the portable pathname character set won't be
affected.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
git-blame --incremental
This adds --incremental option to help GUI porcelains to show
the result from git-blame incrementally. The output gives the
origin information in the same format as the porcelain format.
The first line has commit object name, the line number of the
first line in the group in the original file, the line number of
that file in the final image, and number of lines in the group.
Then subsequent lines show the metainformation for the commit
when the commit is shown for the first time, except the filename
information is always shown (we cannot even make it conditional
to -C option as blame always follows the renaming of the file
wholesale).
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
This adds --incremental option to help GUI porcelains to show
the result from git-blame incrementally. The output gives the
origin information in the same format as the porcelain format.
The first line has commit object name, the line number of the
first line in the group in the original file, the line number of
that file in the final image, and number of lines in the group.
Then subsequent lines show the metainformation for the commit
when the commit is shown for the first time, except the filename
information is always shown (we cannot even make it conditional
to -C option as blame always follows the renaming of the file
wholesale).
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Don't force everybody to call setup_ident().
Back when only handful commands that created commit and tag were
the only users of committer identity information, it made sense
to explicitly call setup_ident() to pre-fill the default value
from the gecos information. But it is much simpler for programs
to make the call automatic when get_ident() is called these days,
since many more programs want to use the information when updating
the reflog.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Back when only handful commands that created commit and tag were
the only users of committer identity information, it made sense
to explicitly call setup_ident() to pre-fill the default value
from the gecos information. But it is much simpler for programs
to make the call automatic when get_ident() is called these days,
since many more programs want to use the information when updating
the reflog.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
git-log -g --pretty=oneline should display the reflog message
In the context of reflog output the reflog message is more useful than
the commit message's first line. When relevant the reflog message
will contain that line anyway.
Signed-off-by: Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
In the context of reflog output the reflog message is more useful than
the commit message's first line. When relevant the reflog message
will contain that line anyway.
Signed-off-by: Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Document --check option to git diff.
Signed-off-by: Bill Lear <rael@zopyra.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Signed-off-by: Bill Lear <rael@zopyra.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Allow the tag signing key to be specified in the config file
I did this:
$ git tag -s test-sign
gpg: skipped "Andy Parkins <andyparkins@gmail.com>": secret key not available
gpg: signing failed: secret key not available
failed to sign the tag with GPG.
The problem is that I have used the comment field in my key's UID
definition.
$ gpg --list-keys andy
pub 1024D/4F712F6D 2003-08-14
uid Andy Parkins (Google) <andyparkins@gmail.com>
So when git-tag looks for "Andy Parkins <andyparkins@gmail.com>";
obviously it's not going to be found.
There shouldn't be a requirement that I use the same form of my name in
my git repository and my gpg key - I might want to be formal (Andrew) in
my gpg key and informal (Andy) in the repository. Further I might have
multiple keys in my keyring, and might want to use one that doesn't
match up with the address I use in commit messages.
This patch adds a configuration entry "user.signingkey" which, if
present, will be passed to the "-u" switch for gpg, allowing the tag
signing key to be overridden. If the entry is not present, the fallback
is the original method, which means existing behaviour will continue
untouched.
Signed-off-by: Andy Parkins <andyparkins@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
I did this:
$ git tag -s test-sign
gpg: skipped "Andy Parkins <andyparkins@gmail.com>": secret key not available
gpg: signing failed: secret key not available
failed to sign the tag with GPG.
The problem is that I have used the comment field in my key's UID
definition.
$ gpg --list-keys andy
pub 1024D/4F712F6D 2003-08-14
uid Andy Parkins (Google) <andyparkins@gmail.com>
So when git-tag looks for "Andy Parkins <andyparkins@gmail.com>";
obviously it's not going to be found.
There shouldn't be a requirement that I use the same form of my name in
my git repository and my gpg key - I might want to be formal (Andrew) in
my gpg key and informal (Andy) in the repository. Further I might have
multiple keys in my keyring, and might want to use one that doesn't
match up with the address I use in commit messages.
This patch adds a configuration entry "user.signingkey" which, if
present, will be passed to the "-u" switch for gpg, allowing the tag
signing key to be overridden. If the entry is not present, the fallback
is the original method, which means existing behaviour will continue
untouched.
Signed-off-by: Andy Parkins <andyparkins@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
If abbrev is set to zero in git-describe, don't add the unique suffix
When on a non-tag commit, git-describe normally outputs descriptions of
the form
v1.0.0-g1234567890
Some scripts (for example the update hook script) might just want to
know the name of the nearest tag, so they then have to do
x=$(git-describe HEAD | sed 's/-g*//')
This is costly, but more importantly is fragile as it is relying on the
output format of git-describe, which we would then have to maintain
forever.
This patch adds support for setting the --abbrev option to zero. In
that case git-describe does as it always has, but outputs only the
nearest found tag instead of a completely unique name. This means that
scripts would not have to parse the output format and won't need
changing if the git-describe suffix is ever changed.
Signed-off-by: Andy Parkins <andyparkins@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
When on a non-tag commit, git-describe normally outputs descriptions of
the form
v1.0.0-g1234567890
Some scripts (for example the update hook script) might just want to
know the name of the nearest tag, so they then have to do
x=$(git-describe HEAD | sed 's/-g*//')
This is costly, but more importantly is fragile as it is relying on the
output format of git-describe, which we would then have to maintain
forever.
This patch adds support for setting the --abbrev option to zero. In
that case git-describe does as it always has, but outputs only the
nearest found tag instead of a completely unique name. This means that
scripts would not have to parse the output format and won't need
changing if the git-describe suffix is ever changed.
Signed-off-by: Andy Parkins <andyparkins@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
fix suggested branch creation command when detaching head
Doing:
$ git checkout HEAD^
Generates the following message:
|warning: you are not on ANY branch anymore.
|If you meant to create a new branch from the commit, you need -b to
|associate a new branch with the wanted checkout. Example:
| git checkout -b <new_branch_name> HEAD^
Of course if the user does as told at this point the created branch
won't be located at the expected commit. Reword this message a bit to
avoid such confusion.
Signed-off-by: Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Doing:
$ git checkout HEAD^
Generates the following message:
|warning: you are not on ANY branch anymore.
|If you meant to create a new branch from the commit, you need -b to
|associate a new branch with the wanted checkout. Example:
| git checkout -b <new_branch_name> HEAD^
Of course if the user does as told at this point the created branch
won't be located at the expected commit. Reword this message a bit to
avoid such confusion.
Signed-off-by: Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>