From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: [RFC] improve 'bad default revision' message for empty repo Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2008 20:07:02 -0500 Message-ID: <20080305010701.GB20007@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <3f4fd2640803011140o38ba0830l7775c8528f812779@mail.gmail.com> <20080303081021.GA6578@sigill.intra.peff.net> <3f4fd2640803041351k6debe788xbf5e818951f70146@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: Reece Dunn To: git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Mar 05 02:07:45 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1JWi6j-0001Ky-Cg for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Wed, 05 Mar 2008 02:07:45 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752083AbYCEBHH (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Mar 2008 20:07:07 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751458AbYCEBHH (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Mar 2008 20:07:07 -0500 Received: from 66-23-211-5.clients.speedfactory.net ([66.23.211.5]:3652 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751254AbYCEBHF (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Mar 2008 20:07:05 -0500 Received: (qmail 27974 invoked by uid 111); 5 Mar 2008 01:07:03 -0000 Received: from lawn-128-61-17-48.lawn.gatech.edu (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (128.61.17.48) (smtp-auth username relayok, mechanism cram-md5) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.32) with ESMTP; Tue, 04 Mar 2008 20:07:03 -0500 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Tue, 04 Mar 2008 20:07:02 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3f4fd2640803041351k6debe788xbf5e818951f70146@mail.gmail.com> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Tue, Mar 04, 2008 at 09:51:02PM +0000, Reece Dunn wrote: > > > Consider the following workflow: > > > > > > $ mkdir foo > > > $ cd foo > > > $ git --bare init > > > > > > $ git log > > > fatal: bad default revision 'HEAD' > > > > > > This message is confusing for a newbie. Displaying "no commits" would > > > make more sense here. What do people think of this patch? It feels a little hack-ish to make guesses as to the reasons for a failure, but in my experience an empty repo is the cause of this message in 99% of cases. We could special-case it to HEAD and make a better message, perhaps, but that feels even more hack-ish. --- revision.c | 2 +- 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) diff --git a/revision.c b/revision.c index 63bf2c5..847dbc8 100644 --- a/revision.c +++ b/revision.c @@ -1324,7 +1324,7 @@ int setup_revisions(int argc, const char **argv, struct rev_info *revs, const ch struct object *object; unsigned mode; if (get_sha1_with_mode(def, sha1, &mode)) - die("bad default revision '%s'", def); + die("unable to resolve '%s'; do you have any commits on this branch?", def); object = get_reference(revs, def, sha1, 0); add_pending_object_with_mode(revs, object, def, mode); } -- 1.5.4.3.531.ga940.dirty