* git bisect; is there a way to pick only from the children of a given commit
@ 2009-07-01 17:12 Robert Stonehouse
2009-07-01 18:59 ` Johannes Schindelin
` (2 more replies)
0 siblings, 3 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Robert Stonehouse @ 2009-07-01 17:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: git
Hi,
I had a problem where I thought git bisect would be a good way forwards.
It didn't work as expected so I made myself a simpler test-case.
featureA (which was a new build target) was broken at HEAD. It had been
developed on the featureA branch. After featureA was merged into master,
featureB (which had branched from master at the same point as featureA) was
merged with master.
$ git log --graph --abbrev-commit --pretty=oneline
* b394c57... master4
* 7e8d675... Merge branch 'featureB'
|\
| * 8d87aee... featureB2
| * c1a8450... featureB1
* | 44c5601... master3
* | 269602a... Merge branch 'featureA'
|\ \
| * | 91b1bbb... featureA2
| * | 0c15834... featureA1
| |/
* | 1ea4a0c... master2
|/
* 204f839... master1
Tag featureA1 was my good commit, and HEAD was the bad.
I was surprised that git bisect was asking me to test commits on the featureB
branch. I couldn't test the build target that was broken on branch featureB
because it wasn't present in the code at that point.
I understand that bisect can choose anywhere from the list of commits that are
included in the ancestry of HEAD but excludes commits in the ancestry of
featureA1
$ git rev-list --pretty=oneline featureA1..HEAD
b394c57d13c11ce5bec63b4e3556ea9a308bc196 master4
7e8d675bb277849d7aaa5c8333f5916455bc3a8a Merge branch 'featureB'
44c5601dbc4c3988553999098cd29fe2bddc2f77 master3
8d87aee0793a96f9d606fd33cb32b337a2e0a518 featureB2
269602a2c5326e475866355986b5dc47f8945b30 Merge branch 'featureA'
c1a8450e552370cc4efc2ea3bf20bf8456051999 featureB1
1ea4a0c51d59ff6471f43e1cb19e207b95baef8a master2
91b1bbbbac551cf315bf6e5e8f7cea988fe8d9e8 featureA2
What I really want to bisect is the list of commits that are children of
featureA1 (or alternatively any commit that have an ancestor of featureA1)
i.e. featureA2, master{3,4}, merge{A,B}
$ git rev-list --pretty=oneline --first-parent featureA1..HEAD
is nearly what I want but I haven't found an option in git-bisect to pass
extra arguments to rev-list. But also --first-parent wouldn't consider
featureA2 in this case.
Is there a way to do what I want (bisect all children of a commit)?
I hope that this description isn't too unreadable!
Many thanks
--
Rob Stonehouse
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: git bisect; is there a way to pick only from the children of a given commit
2009-07-01 17:12 git bisect; is there a way to pick only from the children of a given commit Robert Stonehouse
@ 2009-07-01 18:59 ` Johannes Schindelin
2009-07-01 19:22 ` Sean Estabrooks
2009-07-01 20:02 ` Jakub Narebski
2 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Johannes Schindelin @ 2009-07-01 18:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Robert Stonehouse; +Cc: git
Hi,
On Wed, 1 Jul 2009, Robert Stonehouse wrote:
> featureA (which was a new build target) was broken at HEAD. It had been
> developed on the featureA branch. After featureA was merged into master,
> featureB (which had branched from master at the same point as featureA)
> was merged with master.
Why don't you just mark the merge commit that introduced featureA as bad,
then?
Ciao,
Dscho
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: git bisect; is there a way to pick only from the children of a given commit
2009-07-01 17:12 git bisect; is there a way to pick only from the children of a given commit Robert Stonehouse
2009-07-01 18:59 ` Johannes Schindelin
@ 2009-07-01 19:22 ` Sean Estabrooks
2009-07-02 11:56 ` Robert Stonehouse
2009-07-01 20:02 ` Jakub Narebski
2 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Sean Estabrooks @ 2009-07-01 19:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Robert Stonehouse; +Cc: git
On Wed, 1 Jul 2009 17:12:16 +0000 (UTC)
Robert Stonehouse <rstonehouse@solarflare.com> wrote:
> $ git log --graph --abbrev-commit --pretty=oneline
> * b394c57... master4
> * 7e8d675... Merge branch 'featureB'
> |\
> | * 8d87aee... featureB2
> | * c1a8450... featureB1
> * | 44c5601... master3
> * | 269602a... Merge branch 'featureA'
> |\ \
> | * | 91b1bbb... featureA2
> | * | 0c15834... featureA1
> | |/
> * | 1ea4a0c... master2
> |/
> * 204f839... master1
>
> Tag featureA1 was my good commit, and HEAD was the bad.
> I was surprised that git bisect was asking me to test commits on the featureB
> branch. I couldn't test the build target that was broken on branch featureB
> because it wasn't present in the code at that point.
You can exclude the featureB branch by listing at good. Git will know there
is no need to test anything on that branch:
$ git bisect start HEAD featureA1 featureB2
HTH,
Sean
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: git bisect; is there a way to pick only from the children of a given commit
2009-07-01 17:12 git bisect; is there a way to pick only from the children of a given commit Robert Stonehouse
2009-07-01 18:59 ` Johannes Schindelin
2009-07-01 19:22 ` Sean Estabrooks
@ 2009-07-01 20:02 ` Jakub Narebski
2 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Jakub Narebski @ 2009-07-01 20:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Robert Stonehouse; +Cc: git
Robert Stonehouse <rstonehouse@solarflare.com> writes:
> I had a problem where I thought git bisect would be a good way forwards.
> It didn't work as expected so I made myself a simpler test-case.
>
> featureA (which was a new build target) was broken at HEAD. It had been
> developed on the featureA branch. After featureA was merged into master,
> featureB (which had branched from master at the same point as featureA) was
> merged with master.
>
> $ git log --graph --abbrev-commit --pretty=oneline
> * b394c57... master4
> * 7e8d675... Merge branch 'featureB'
> |\
> | * 8d87aee... featureB2
> | * c1a8450... featureB1
> * | 44c5601... master3
> * | 269602a... Merge branch 'featureA'
> |\ \
> | * | 91b1bbb... featureA2
> | * | 0c15834... featureA1
> | |/
> * | 1ea4a0c... master2
> |/
> * 204f839... master1
>
> Tag featureA1 was my good commit, and HEAD was the bad.
> I was surprised that git bisect was asking me to test commits on the featureB
> branch. I couldn't test the build target that was broken on branch featureB
> because it wasn't present in the code at that point.
That is what "git bisect skip [<rev>|<range>...]" is for."
> Is there a way to do what I want (bisect all children of a commit)?
Also in 'pu' there is refs/replace mechanism, which was intendend
mainly to "repair" un-bisectable history...
--
Jakub Narebski
Poland
ShadeHawk on #git
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: git bisect; is there a way to pick only from the children of a given commit
2009-07-01 19:22 ` Sean Estabrooks
@ 2009-07-02 11:56 ` Robert Stonehouse
2009-07-03 4:42 ` Christian Couder
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Robert Stonehouse @ 2009-07-02 11:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: git
Sean Estabrooks wrote:
> On Wed, 1 Jul 2009 17:12:16 +0000 (UTC)
> Robert Stonehouse <rstonehouse@solarflare.com> wrote:
>> I was surprised that git bisect was asking me to test commits on the
featureB
>> branch. I couldn't test the build target that was broken on branch
featureB
>> because it wasn't present in the code at that point.
>
> You can exclude the featureB branch by listing at good. Git will
know there
> is no need to test anything on that branch:
In my toy example it is easy to identify featureB branch as being
independent and marking it as good - but in a real repository it would
be much harder as they might be many more merges.
I think if I changed my usage of git bisect good and bad to:
good => build completes
OR a revision that does not have the new build target
bad => new build target fails
then I think it will converge to the problem commit. So perhaps this was
just an issue of semantics
Thanks for your help
--
Rob Stonehouse
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: git bisect; is there a way to pick only from the children of a given commit
2009-07-02 11:56 ` Robert Stonehouse
@ 2009-07-03 4:42 ` Christian Couder
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Christian Couder @ 2009-07-03 4:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Robert Stonehouse; +Cc: git
On Thursday 02 July 2009, Robert Stonehouse wrote:
>
> In my toy example it is easy to identify featureB branch as being
> independent and marking it as good - but in a real repository it would
> be much harder as they might be many more merges.
As Jakub said, when the current commit is untestable, "git bisect skip" is
the most logical command to use.
Now if you have more information than just "the current commit is
untestable", for example if you know that the current commit is on a side
branch that has work unrelated to the breakage you are looking for, and if
you know that the branch started from a "good" commit, then you can
use "git bisect good" instead, because you know the commit is good even if
you have not tested it.
> I think if I changed my usage of git bisect good and bad to:
> good => build completes
> OR a revision that does not have the new build target
> bad => new build target fails
> then I think it will converge to the problem commit. So perhaps this was
> just an issue of semantics
I'd say that it's an issue of information. If you already have the
information that some commits are good before testing them, then you should
use "git bisect good" even if you can't test them.
Best regards,
Christian.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2009-07-03 4:42 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2009-07-01 17:12 git bisect; is there a way to pick only from the children of a given commit Robert Stonehouse
2009-07-01 18:59 ` Johannes Schindelin
2009-07-01 19:22 ` Sean Estabrooks
2009-07-02 11:56 ` Robert Stonehouse
2009-07-03 4:42 ` Christian Couder
2009-07-01 20:02 ` Jakub Narebski
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).