When we run `branch --merged`, we use prepare_revision_walk
with the merge-filter marked as UNINTERESTING. Any branch
tips that are marked UNINTERESTING after it returns must be
ancestors of that commit. As we iterate through the list of
refs to show, we check item->commit->object.flags to see
whether it was marked.
This interacts badly with --verbose, which will do a
separate walk to find the ahead/behind information for each
branch. There are two bad things that can happen:
1. The ahead/behind walk may get the wrong results,
because it can see a bogus UNINTERESTING flag leftover
from the merge-filter walk.
2. We may omit some branches if their tips are involved in
the ahead/behind traversal of a branch shown earlier.
The ahead/behind walk carefully cleans up its commit
flags, meaning it may also erase the UNINTERESTING
flag that we expect to check later.
We can solve this by moving the merge-filter state for each
ref into its "struct ref_item" as soon as we finish the
merge-filter walk. That fixes (2). Then we are free to clear
the commit flags we used in the walk, fixing (1).
Note that we actually do away with the matches_merge_filter
helper entirely here, and inline it between the revision
walk and the flag-clearing. This ensures that nobody
accidentally calls it at the wrong time (it is only safe to
check in that instant between the setting and clearing of
the global flag).
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Even the documentation tells us:
You should check if it returns any error (non-zero return
code) and if it does not, you can start using get_revision()
to do the iteration.
In preparation for this commit, I grepped all occurrences of
prepare_revision_walk and added error messages, when there were none.
Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller <stefanbeller@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The skip_prefix() function returns a pointer to the content
past the prefix, or NULL if the prefix was not found. While
this is nice and simple, in practice it makes it hard to use
for two reasons:
1. When you want to conditionally skip or keep the string
as-is, you have to introduce a temporary variable.
For example:
tmp = skip_prefix(buf, "foo");
if (tmp)
buf = tmp;
2. It is verbose to check the outcome in a conditional, as
you need extra parentheses to silence compiler
warnings. For example:
if ((cp = skip_prefix(buf, "foo"))
/* do something with cp */
Both of these make it harder to use for long if-chains, and
we tend to use starts_with() instead. However, the first line
of "do something" is often to then skip forward in buf past
the prefix, either using a magic constant or with an extra
strlen(3) (which is generally computed at compile time, but
means we are repeating ourselves).
This patch refactors skip_prefix() to return a simple boolean,
and to provide the pointer value as an out-parameter. If the
prefix is not found, the out-parameter is untouched. This
lets you write:
if (skip_prefix(arg, "foo ", &arg))
do_foo(arg);
else if (skip_prefix(arg, "bar ", &arg))
do_bar(arg);
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Make it clear that we don't use fnmatch() anymore.
Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Remove a few duplicate implementations of prefix/suffix comparison
functions, and rename them to starts_with and ends_with.
* cc/starts-n-ends-with:
replace {pre,suf}fixcmp() with {starts,ends}_with()
strbuf: introduce starts_with() and ends_with()
builtin/remote: remove postfixcmp() and use suffixcmp() instead
environment: normalize use of prefixcmp() by removing " != 0"
Leaving only the function definitions and declarations so that any
new topic in flight can still make use of the old functions, replace
existing uses of the prefixcmp() and suffixcmp() with new API
functions.
The change can be recreated by mechanically applying this:
$ git grep -l -e prefixcmp -e suffixcmp -- \*.c |
grep -v strbuf\\.c |
xargs perl -pi -e '
s|!prefixcmp\(|starts_with\(|g;
s|prefixcmp\(|!starts_with\(|g;
s|!suffixcmp\(|ends_with\(|g;
s|suffixcmp\(|!ends_with\(|g;
'
on the result of preparatory changes in this series.
Signed-off-by: Christian Couder <chriscool@tuxfamily.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
* jk/robustify-parse-commit:
checkout: do not die when leaving broken detached HEAD
use parse_commit_or_die instead of custom message
use parse_commit_or_die instead of segfaulting
assume parse_commit checks for NULL commit
assume parse_commit checks commit->object.parsed
log_tree_diff: die when we fail to parse a commit
Commit f2e0873 (branch: report invalid tracking branch as gone) removed
an early return from fill_tracking_info() in the path taken when 'git
branch -v' lists a branch in sync with its upstream. This resulted in an
unconditionally added space in front of the subject line:
$ git branch -v
* master f5eb3da commit pushed to upstream
topic f935eb6 unpublished topic
Instead, only add the trailing space if a decoration have been added.
To catch this kind of whitespace breakage in the tests, be a bit less
smart when filtering the output through sed.
Signed-off-by: Torstein Hegge <hegge@resisty.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The parse_commit function will check whether it was passed a
NULL commit pointer, and if so, return an error. There is no
need for callers to check this separately.
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
"git branch -v -v" (and "git status") did not distinguish among a
branch that does not build on any other branch, a branch that is in
sync with the branch it builds on, and a branch that is configured
to build on some other branch that no longer exists.
* jx/branch-vv-always-compare-with-upstream:
status: always show tracking branch even no change
branch: report invalid tracking branch as gone
Command "git branch -vv" will report tracking branches, but invalid
tracking branches are also reported. This is because the function
stat_tracking_info() can not distinguish invalid tracking branch
from other cases which it would not like to report, such as
there is no upstream settings at all, or nothing is changed between
one branch and its upstream.
Junio suggested missing upstream should be reported [1] like:
$ git branch -v -v
master e67ac84 initial
* topic 3fc0f2a [topicbase: gone] topic
$ git status
# On branch topic
# Your branch is based on 'topicbase', but the upstream is gone.
# (use "git branch --unset-upstream" to fixup)
...
$ git status -b -s
## topic...topicbase [gone]
...
In order to do like that, we need to distinguish these three cases
(i.e. no tracking, with configured but no longer valid tracking, and
with tracking) in function stat_tracking_info(). So the refactored
function stat_tracking_info() has three return values: -1 (with "gone"
base), 0 (no base), and 1 (with base).
If the caller does not like to report tracking info when nothing
changed between the branch and its upstream, simply checks if
num_theirs and num_ours are both 0.
[1]: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/231830/focus=232288
Suggested-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Signed-off-by: Jiang Xin <worldhello.net@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Now that the variables are set by OPT_BOOL, which makes sure
to have the values being 0 or 1 after parsing, we do not need
the double negation to map any other value to 1 for integer
variables.
Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller <stefanbeller@googlemail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
This task emerged from b04ba2bb (parse-options: deprecate OPT_BOOLEAN,
2011-09-27). All occurrences of the respective variables have
been reviewed and none of them relied on the counting up mechanism,
but all of them were using the variable as a true boolean.
This patch does not change semantics of any command intentionally.
Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller <stefanbeller@googlemail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Otherwise when using 'git branch -vv' it's hard to see them among so
much output.
Signed-off-by: Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
"git branch -m" without any argument noticed an error, but with an
incorrect error message.
* jm/branch-rename-nothing-error:
branch: give better message when no names specified for rename
Add a bit more information to "git status" during a rebase/bisect
session.
* nd/branch-show-rebase-bisect-state:
status, branch: fix the misleading "bisecting" message
branch: show more information when HEAD is detached
status: show more info than "currently not on any branch"
wt-status: move wt_status_get_state() out to wt_status_print()
wt-status: split wt_status_state parsing function out
wt-status: move strbuf into read_and_strip_branch()
The current message is "bisecting %s" (or "bisecting branch %s").
"%s" is the current branch when we started bisecting. Clarify that to
avoid confusion with good and bad refs passed to "bisect" command.
Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
"git branch" had more cases where it did not bother to check
nonsense command line parameters.
* nd/branch-error-cases:
branch: segfault fixes and validation
This prints more helpful info when HEAD is detached: is it detached
because of bisect or rebase? What is the original branch name in those
cases? Is it detached because the user checks out a remote ref or a
tag (and which one)?
Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
branch_get() can return NULL (so far on detached HEAD only) but some
code paths in builtin/branch.c cannot deal with that and cause
segfaults.
While at there, make sure to bail out when the user gives 2 or more
branches with --set-upstream-to or --unset-upstream, where only the
first branch is processed and the rest silently dropped.
Reported-by: Per Cederqvist <cederp@opera.com>
Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Fix various error messages and conditions in "git branch", e.g. we
advertised "branch -d/-D" to remove one or more branches but actually
implemented removal of zero or more branches---request to remove no
branches was not rejected.
* nd/branch-error-cases:
branch: let branch filters imply --list
docs: clarify git-branch --list behavior
branch: mark more strings for translation
branch: give a more helpful message on redundant arguments
branch: reject -D/-d without branch name
Allow a configuration variable core.commentchar to customize the
character used to comment out the hint lines in the edited text from
the default '#'.
* jc/custom-comment-char:
Allow custom "comment char"
Attempt to "branch --edit-description" an existing branch, while
being on a detached HEAD, errored out.
* nd/edit-branch-desc-while-detached:
branch: no detached HEAD check when editing another branch's description
Currently, a branch filter like `--contains`, `--merged`, or
`--no-merged` is ignored when we are not in listing mode.
For example:
git branch --contains=foo bar
will create the branch "bar" from the current HEAD, ignoring
the `--contains` argument entirely. This is not very
helpful. There are two reasonable behaviors for git here:
1. Flag an error; the arguments do not make sense.
2. Implicitly go into `--list` mode
This patch chooses the latter, as it is more convenient, and
there should not be any ambiguity with attempting to create
a branch; using `--contains` and not wanting to list is
nonsensical.
That leaves the case where an explicit modification option
like `-d` is given. We already catch the case where
`--list` is given alongside `-d` and flag an error. With
this patch, we will also catch the use of `--contains` and
other filter options alongside `-d`.
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Reviewed-by: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Some users do want to write a line that begin with a pound sign, #,
in their commit log message. Many tracking system recognise
a token of #<bugid> form, for example.
The support we offer these use cases is not very friendly to the end
users. They have a choice between
- Don't do it. Avoid such a line by rewrapping or indenting; and
- Use --cleanup=whitespace but remove all the hint lines we add.
Give them a way to set a custom comment char, e.g.
$ git -c core.commentchar="%" commit
so that they do not have to do either of the two workarounds.
[jc: although I started the topic, all the tests and documentation
updates, many of the call sites of the new strbuf_add_commented_*()
functions, and the change to git-submodule.sh scripted Porcelain are
from Ralf.]
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Signed-off-by: Ralf Thielow <ralf.thielow@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Teach various forms of "format-patch" command line to identify what
branch the patches are taken from, so that the branch description
is picked up in more cases.
* nd/maint-branch-desc-doc:
format-patch: pick up branch description when no ref is specified
format-patch: pick up correct branch name from symbolic ref
t4014: a few more tests on cover letter using branch description
branch: delete branch description if it's empty
config.txt: a few lines about branch.<name>.description
git branch reports the abbreviated hash of the head commit of
a deleted branch to make it easier for a user to undo the
operation. For symref branches this doesn't help. Print the
symref target instead for them.
Signed-off-by: Rene Scharfe <rene.scharfe@lsrfire.ath.cx>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Before a branch is deleted, we check that it points to a valid
commit. With -d we also check that the commit is a merged; this
check is not done with -D.
The reason for that is that commits pointed to by branches should
never go missing; if they do then something broke and it's better
to stop instead of adding to the mess. And a non-merged commit
may contain changes that are worth preserving, so we require the
stronger option -D instead of -d to get rid of them.
If a branch consists of a symref, these concerns don't apply.
Deleting such a branch can't make a commit become unreferenced,
so we don't need to check if it is merged, or even if it is
actually a valid commit. Skip them in that case. This allows
us to delete dangling symref branches.
Signed-off-by: Rene Scharfe <rene.scharfe@lsrfire.ath.cx>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
If a branch that is to be deleted happens to be a symref to another
branch, the current code removes the targeted branch instead of the
one it was called for.
Change this surprising behaviour and delete the symref branch
instead.
Signed-off-by: Rene Scharfe <rene.scharfe@lsrfire.ath.cx>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Provide a small helper function for deleting branch config sections.
Signed-off-by: Rene Scharfe <rene.scharfe@lsrfire.ath.cx>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Move the code to perform checks on the tip commit of a branch
to its own function.
Signed-off-by: Rene Scharfe <rene.scharfe@lsrfire.ath.cx>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
* rj/path-cleanup:
Call mkpathdup() rather than xstrdup(mkpath(...))
Call git_pathdup() rather than xstrdup(git_path("..."))
path.c: Use vsnpath() in the implementation of git_path()
path.c: Don't discard the return value of vsnpath()
path.c: Remove the 'git_' prefix from a file scope function
Optimise the "merge-base" computation a bit, and also update its
users that do not need the full merge-base information to call a
cheaper subset.
* jc/merge-bases:
reduce_heads(): reimplement on top of remove_redundant()
merge-base: "--is-ancestor A B"
get_merge_bases_many(): walk from many tips in parallel
in_merge_bases(): use paint_down_to_common()
merge_bases_many(): split out the logic to paint history
in_merge_bases(): omit unnecessary redundant common ancestor reduction
http-push: use in_merge_bases() for fast-forward check
receive-pack: use in_merge_bases() for fast-forward check
in_merge_bases(): support only one "other" commit
"git branch --set-upstream origin/master" is a common mistake to
create a local branch 'origin/master' and set it to integrate with
the current branch. With a plan to deprecate this option, introduce
"git branch (-u|--set-upstream-to) origin/master" that sets the
current branch to integrate with 'origin/master' remote tracking
branch.
* cn/branch-set-upstream-to:
branch: deprecate --set-upstream and show help if we detect possible mistaken use
branch: add --unset-upstream option
branch: introduce --set-upstream-to
Output from "git branch -v" contains "(no branch)" that could be
localized, but the code to align it along with the names of branches
were counting in bytes, not in display columns.
* nd/branch-v-alignment:
branch -v: align even when branch names are in UTF-8
In addition to updating the xstrdup(mkpath(...)) call sites with
mkpathdup(), we also fix a memory leak (in merge_3way()) caused by
neglecting to free the memory allocated to the 'base_name' variable.
Signed-off-by: Ramsay Jones <ramsay@ramsay1.demon.co.uk>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
This interface is error prone, and a better one (--set-upstream-to)
exists. Add a message listing the alternatives and suggest how to fix
a --set-upstream invocation in case the user only gives one argument
which causes a local branch with the same name as a remote-tracking
one to be created. The typical case is
git branch --set-upstream origin/master
when the user meant
git branch --set-upstream master origin/master
assuming that the current branch is master. Show a message telling the
user how to undo their action and get what they wanted. For the
command above, the message would be
The --set-upstream flag is deprecated and will be removed. Consider using --track or --set-upstream-to
Branch origin/master set up to track local branch master.
If you wanted to make 'master' track 'origin/master', do this:
git branch -d origin/master
git branch --set-upstream-to origin/master
Signed-off-by: Carlos Martín Nieto <cmn@elego.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
We have ways of setting the upstream information, but if we want to
unset it, we need to resort to modifying the configuration manually.
Teach branch an --unset-upstream option that unsets this information.
Signed-off-by: Carlos Martín Nieto <cmn@elego.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
In early days of its life, I planned to make it possible to compute
"is a commit contained in all of these other commits?" with this
function, but it turned out that no caller needed it.
Just make it take two commit objects and add a comment to say what
these two functions do.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Branch names are usually in ASCII so they are not the problem. The
problem most likely comes from "(no branch)" translation, which is
in UTF-8 and makes display-width calculation just wrong. Clarify
this by renaming the field "len" in struct ref_item to "width", as
it stores the display-width and is used to compute the width of the
screen needed to show the names of all the branches, and compute the
display width using utf8_strwidth(), not byte-length with strlen().
Update document to mention the fact that we may want ref names in
UTF-8. Encodings that produce invalid UTF-8 are safe as utf8_strwidth()
falls back to strlen(). The ones that incidentally produce valid UTF-8
sequences will cause misalignment.
Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
