Git development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [PATCH 2/2] Fix for git-rev-list --merge-order B ^A (A,B share common base) [rev 2]
@ 2005-06-30  1:51 Jon Seymour
  0 siblings, 0 replies; only message in thread
From: Jon Seymour @ 2005-06-30  1:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: git; +Cc: torvalds, jon.seymour


This patch makes --merge-order produce the same list as git-rev-list 
without --merge-order specified.

In particular, if the graph looks like this:

A
| B
|/ 
C
|
D

The both git-rev-list B ^A and git-rev-list --merge-order will produce B.

The unit tests have been changed to reflect the fact that the prune
points are now formally part of the start list that is used to perform
the --merge-order sort.

That is: git-rev-list --merge-order A ^D used to produce

= A
| C

It now produces:

^ A
| C

Signed-off-by: Jon Seymour <jon.seymour@gmail.com>
---

 epoch.c                         |    8 +++-----
 t/t6001-rev-list-merge-order.sh |   12 ++++++------
 2 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)

d402f03f56475c30c3b62577c5a42af09f6b95b8
diff --git a/epoch.c b/epoch.c
--- a/epoch.c
+++ b/epoch.c
@@ -585,11 +585,9 @@ int sort_list_in_merge_order(struct comm
 	for (; list; list = list->next) {
 		struct commit *next = list->item;
 
-		if (!(next->object.flags & UNINTERESTING)) {
-			if (!(next->object.flags & DUPCHECK)) {
-				next->object.flags |= DUPCHECK;
-				commit_list_insert(list->item, &reversed);
-			}
+		if (!(next->object.flags & DUPCHECK)) {
+			next->object.flags |= DUPCHECK;
+			commit_list_insert(list->item, &reversed);
 		}
 	}
 
diff --git a/t/t6001-rev-list-merge-order.sh b/t/t6001-rev-list-merge-order.sh
--- a/t/t6001-rev-list-merge-order.sh
+++ b/t/t6001-rev-list-merge-order.sh
@@ -367,33 +367,33 @@ test_output_expect_success "three nodes 
 EOF
 
 test_output_expect_success "linear prune l2 ^root" 'git-rev-list --merge-order --show-breaks l2 ^root' <<EOF
-= l2
+^ l2
 | l1
 | l0
 EOF
 
 test_output_expect_success "linear prune l2 ^l0" 'git-rev-list --merge-order --show-breaks l2 ^l0' <<EOF
-= l2
+^ l2
 | l1
 EOF
 
 test_output_expect_success "linear prune l2 ^l1" 'git-rev-list --merge-order --show-breaks l2 ^l1' <<EOF
-= l2
+^ l2
 EOF
 
 test_output_expect_success "linear prune l5 ^a4" 'git-rev-list --merge-order --show-breaks l5 ^a4' <<EOF
-= l5
+^ l5
 | l4
 | l3
 EOF
 
 test_output_expect_success "linear prune l5 ^l3" 'git-rev-list --merge-order --show-breaks l5 ^l3' <<EOF
-= l5
+^ l5
 | l4
 EOF
 
 test_output_expect_success "linear prune l5 ^l4" 'git-rev-list --merge-order --show-breaks l5 ^l4' <<EOF
-= l5
+^ l5
 EOF
 
 test_output_expect_success "max-count 10 - merge order" 'git-rev-list --merge-order --show-breaks --max-count=10 l5' <<EOF
------------

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] only message in thread

only message in thread, other threads:[~2005-06-30  2:17 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: (only message) (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2005-06-30  1:51 [PATCH 2/2] Fix for git-rev-list --merge-order B ^A (A,B share common base) [rev 2] Jon Seymour

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox