1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/git/git.git synced 2024-11-15 13:43:45 +01:00
git/git-pull.sh

121 lines
3.2 KiB
Bash
Raw Normal View History

#!/bin/sh
#
# Copyright (c) 2005 Junio C Hamano
#
# Fetch one or more remote refs and merge it/them into the current HEAD.
USAGE='[-n | --no-summary] [--no-commit] [-s strategy]... [<fetch-options>] <repo> <head>...'
LONG_USAGE='Fetch one or more remote refs and merge it/them into the current HEAD.'
SUBDIRECTORY_OK=Yes
. git-sh-setup
set_reflog_action "pull $*"
require_work_tree
cd_to_toplevel
test -z "$(git ls-files -u)" ||
die "You are in the middle of a conflicted merge."
git-merge --squash Some people tend to do many little commits on a topic branch, recording all the trials and errors, and when the topic is reasonably cooked well, would want to record the net effect of the series as one commit on top of the mainline, removing the cruft from the history. The topic is then abandoned or forked off again from that point at the mainline. The barebone porcelainish that comes with core git tools does not officially support such operation, but you can fake it by using "git pull --no-merge" when such a topic branch is not a strict superset of the mainline, like this: git checkout mainline git pull --no-commit . that-topic-branch : fix conflicts if any rm -f .git/MERGE_HEAD git commit -a -m 'consolidated commit log message' git branch -f that-topic-branch ;# now fully merged This however does not work when the topic branch is a fast forward of the mainline, because normal "git pull" will never create a merge commit in such a case, and there is nothing special --no-commit could do to begin with. This patch introduces a new option, --squash, to support such a workflow officially in both fast-forward case and true merge case. The user-level operation would be the same in both cases: git checkout mainline git pull --squash . that-topic-branch : fix conflicts if any -- naturally, there would be : no conflict if fast forward. git commit -a -m 'consolidated commit log message' git branch -f that-topic-branch ;# now fully merged When the current branch is already up-to-date with respect to the other branch, there truly is nothing to do, so the new option does not have any effect. This was brought up in #git IRC channel recently. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-06-23 10:37:02 +02:00
strategy_args= no_summary= no_commit= squash=
while case "$#,$1" in 0) break ;; *,-*) ;; *) break ;; esac
do
case "$1" in
-n|--n|--no|--no-|--no-s|--no-su|--no-sum|--no-summ|\
--no-summa|--no-summar|--no-summary)
no_summary=-n ;;
--no-c|--no-co|--no-com|--no-comm|--no-commi|--no-commit)
no_commit=--no-commit ;;
git-merge --squash Some people tend to do many little commits on a topic branch, recording all the trials and errors, and when the topic is reasonably cooked well, would want to record the net effect of the series as one commit on top of the mainline, removing the cruft from the history. The topic is then abandoned or forked off again from that point at the mainline. The barebone porcelainish that comes with core git tools does not officially support such operation, but you can fake it by using "git pull --no-merge" when such a topic branch is not a strict superset of the mainline, like this: git checkout mainline git pull --no-commit . that-topic-branch : fix conflicts if any rm -f .git/MERGE_HEAD git commit -a -m 'consolidated commit log message' git branch -f that-topic-branch ;# now fully merged This however does not work when the topic branch is a fast forward of the mainline, because normal "git pull" will never create a merge commit in such a case, and there is nothing special --no-commit could do to begin with. This patch introduces a new option, --squash, to support such a workflow officially in both fast-forward case and true merge case. The user-level operation would be the same in both cases: git checkout mainline git pull --squash . that-topic-branch : fix conflicts if any -- naturally, there would be : no conflict if fast forward. git commit -a -m 'consolidated commit log message' git branch -f that-topic-branch ;# now fully merged When the current branch is already up-to-date with respect to the other branch, there truly is nothing to do, so the new option does not have any effect. This was brought up in #git IRC channel recently. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-06-23 10:37:02 +02:00
--sq|--squ|--squa|--squas|--squash)
squash=--squash ;;
-s=*|--s=*|--st=*|--str=*|--stra=*|--strat=*|--strate=*|\
--strateg=*|--strategy=*|\
-s|--s|--st|--str|--stra|--strat|--strate|--strateg|--strategy)
case "$#,$1" in
*,*=*)
strategy=`expr "z$1" : 'z-[^=]*=\(.*\)'` ;;
1,*)
usage ;;
*)
strategy="$2"
shift ;;
esac
strategy_args="${strategy_args}-s $strategy "
;;
-h|--h|--he|--hel|--help)
usage
;;
-*)
# Pass thru anything that is meant for fetch.
break
;;
esac
shift
done
orig_head=$(git-rev-parse --verify HEAD 2>/dev/null)
git-fetch --update-head-ok "$@" || exit 1
curr_head=$(git-rev-parse --verify HEAD 2>/dev/null)
if test "$curr_head" != "$orig_head"
then
# The fetch involved updating the current branch.
# The working tree and the index file is still based on the
# $orig_head commit, but we are merging into $curr_head.
# First update the working tree to match $curr_head.
echo >&2 "Warning: fetch updated the current branch head."
echo >&2 "Warning: fast forwarding your working tree from"
echo >&2 "Warning: commit $orig_head."
git-update-index --refresh 2>/dev/null
git-read-tree -u -m "$orig_head" "$curr_head" ||
die 'Cannot fast-forward your working tree.
After making sure that you saved anything precious from
$ git diff '$orig_head'
output, run
$ git reset --hard
to recover.'
fi
merge_head=$(sed -e '/ not-for-merge /d' \
-e 's/ .*//' "$GIT_DIR"/FETCH_HEAD | \
tr '\012' ' ')
case "$merge_head" in
'')
curr_branch=$(git-symbolic-ref -q HEAD)
case $? in
0) ;;
1) echo >&2 "You are not currently on a branch; you must explicitly"
echo >&2 "specify which branch you wish to merge:"
echo >&2 " git pull <remote> <branch>"
exit 1;;
*) exit $?;;
esac
curr_branch=${curr_branch#refs/heads/}
echo >&2 "Warning: No merge candidate found because value of config option
\"branch.${curr_branch}.merge\" does not match any remote branch fetched."
echo >&2 "No changes."
exit 0
;;
?*' '?*)
if test -z "$orig_head"
then
echo >&2 "Cannot merge multiple branches into empty head"
exit 1
fi
;;
esac
if test -z "$orig_head"
then
git-update-ref -m "initial pull" HEAD $merge_head "" &&
git-read-tree --reset -u HEAD || exit 1
exit
fi
merge_name=$(git-fmt-merge-msg <"$GIT_DIR/FETCH_HEAD") || exit
exec git-merge $no_summary $no_commit $squash $strategy_args \
git-merge --squash Some people tend to do many little commits on a topic branch, recording all the trials and errors, and when the topic is reasonably cooked well, would want to record the net effect of the series as one commit on top of the mainline, removing the cruft from the history. The topic is then abandoned or forked off again from that point at the mainline. The barebone porcelainish that comes with core git tools does not officially support such operation, but you can fake it by using "git pull --no-merge" when such a topic branch is not a strict superset of the mainline, like this: git checkout mainline git pull --no-commit . that-topic-branch : fix conflicts if any rm -f .git/MERGE_HEAD git commit -a -m 'consolidated commit log message' git branch -f that-topic-branch ;# now fully merged This however does not work when the topic branch is a fast forward of the mainline, because normal "git pull" will never create a merge commit in such a case, and there is nothing special --no-commit could do to begin with. This patch introduces a new option, --squash, to support such a workflow officially in both fast-forward case and true merge case. The user-level operation would be the same in both cases: git checkout mainline git pull --squash . that-topic-branch : fix conflicts if any -- naturally, there would be : no conflict if fast forward. git commit -a -m 'consolidated commit log message' git branch -f that-topic-branch ;# now fully merged When the current branch is already up-to-date with respect to the other branch, there truly is nothing to do, so the new option does not have any effect. This was brought up in #git IRC channel recently. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-06-23 10:37:02 +02:00
"$merge_name" HEAD $merge_head