* Malformed branch name in fast-export when specifying non-HEAD/branch revision [not found] <CAORuUR1viqG27+dYOFS_5SLxFOE2wHJqAQ3i3RByg_fbWACh-Q@mail.gmail.com> @ 2011-08-17 16:21 ` Owen Stephens 2011-08-17 19:36 ` Elijah Newren 0 siblings, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread From: Owen Stephens @ 2011-08-17 16:21 UTC (permalink / raw) To: git Hi, fast-export gives an invalid branch name for commits, if the revision specified is not HEAD or a branch name. $ git --version git version 1.7.6 $ # Create $ git init export_test && cd export_test $ touch a && git add a && git commit -m 'Add a' $ touch b && git add b && git commit -m 'Add b' $ git branch branch1 $ # ok $ git fast-export HEAD $ # also ok $ git fast-export branch1 $ # uses HEAD~1 instead of refs/heads/master $ git fast-export HEAD~1 blob mark :1 data 0 reset HEAD~1 commit HEAD~1 mark :2 author Owen Stephens <git@owenstephens.co.uk> 1313597436 +0100 committer Owen Stephens <git@owenstephens.co.uk> 1313597436 +0100 data 6 Add a M 100644 :1 a $ # Uses the commit hash rather than refs/heads/master $ git fast-export $(git rev-parse HEAD~1) blob mark :1 data 0 reset 5a8a8abb1ab44890501c64f2d51f671ab2108d60 commit 5a8a8abb1ab44890501c64f2d51f671ab2108d60 mark :2 author Owen Stephens <git@owenstephens.co.uk> 1313597436 +0100 committer Owen Stephens <git@owenstephens.co.uk> 1313597436 +0100 data 6 Add a M 100644 :1 a $ # fast-import cannot handle this stream: $ git init subgit $ git fast-export HEAD~1 | (cd subgit/ && git fast-import) fatal: Branch name doesn't conform to GIT standards: HEAD~1 fast-import: dumping crash report to .git/fast_import_crash_26863 Regards, Owen. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: Malformed branch name in fast-export when specifying non-HEAD/branch revision 2011-08-17 16:21 ` Malformed branch name in fast-export when specifying non-HEAD/branch revision Owen Stephens @ 2011-08-17 19:36 ` Elijah Newren 2011-08-17 22:30 ` Junio C Hamano 0 siblings, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread From: Elijah Newren @ 2011-08-17 19:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Owen Stephens; +Cc: git Hi, On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 10:21 AM, Owen Stephens <git@owenstephens.co.uk> wrote: > fast-export gives an invalid branch name for commits, if the revision specified > is not HEAD or a branch name. > > $ git --version > git version 1.7.6 > > $ # Create > $ git init export_test && cd export_test > $ touch a && git add a && git commit -m 'Add a' > $ touch b && git add b && git commit -m 'Add b' > $ git branch branch1 > > $ # ok > $ git fast-export HEAD > > $ # also ok > $ git fast-export branch1 > > $ # uses HEAD~1 instead of refs/heads/master > $ git fast-export HEAD~1 > > blob > mark :1 > data 0 > > reset HEAD~1 > commit HEAD~1 Thanks for the report. It turns out this bug has been reported and is in the testsuite as t9350.19 -- currently marked as expected to fail. I looked at the problem a couple years ago for a little bit but never finished that particular patch and never got back around to it. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: Malformed branch name in fast-export when specifying non-HEAD/branch revision 2011-08-17 19:36 ` Elijah Newren @ 2011-08-17 22:30 ` Junio C Hamano 2011-08-17 23:19 ` Jeff King 0 siblings, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread From: Junio C Hamano @ 2011-08-17 22:30 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Elijah Newren; +Cc: Owen Stephens, git, Sverre Rabbelier Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com> writes: >> $ # uses HEAD~1 instead of refs/heads/master >> $ git fast-export HEAD~1 >> >> blob >> mark :1 >> data 0 >> >> reset HEAD~1 >> commit HEAD~1 > > Thanks for the report. It turns out this bug has been reported and is > in the testsuite as t9350.19 -- currently marked as expected to fail. > I looked at the problem a couple years ago for a little bit but never > finished that particular patch and never got back around to it. What _should_ be the right behaviour to begin with, I have to wonder. Even though it is very clear that the set of objects that are exported are defined by the "rev-list arguments" given to the command, I do not think fast-export's semantics is not clearly defined as to what "refs" are to be updated. The easiest fix for this issue would be to forbid "git fast-export HEAD~1" (or any range whose positive endpoints are _not_ refs), and I think that would be in line with the original motivation of the command to export the whole repository in a format fast-import would understand. The original f2dc849 (Add 'git fast-export', the sister of 'git fast-import', 2007-12-02) says "This program dumps (parts of) a git repository...", implying that partial export is within the scope of the command, but I do not think it was designed carefully enough to deal with ranges more complex than just "a set of branches". I however have a feeling that people would want to say: - I want to export up to that commit, and have that commit on this branch on the importing side; or even better - I want to export up to that commit, but what refs points at the commits contained in the output stream will be decided when the output is imported. I do not think the latter meshes well with how "fast-import" works, though. But fast-export should be fixable to allow the former without breaking the semantics of fast-import. You can think of "fast-export" an off-line "push" command [*1*]; instead of giving a random commit object, e.g. "git fast-export HEAD~1", that can not be used as a ref, you can use the refspec notation to tell where the result should go, e.g. "git fast-export HEAD~1:refs/heads/a-bit-older", from the command line of fast-export. I suspect that also may clarify what Sverre was trying to do in his recent series. The root cause of both this and the issue Sverre wanted to fix is the design mistake of fast-export that tries to reuse the notation of object range specification for a different purpose of telling which "ref" to update, I think. [Footnote] *1* In a similar sense, unpacking "git bundle" output is an off-line "fetch"; the bundle creator gave anchor points for tip objects, and allows the unpacker to map them into its own namespace. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: Malformed branch name in fast-export when specifying non-HEAD/branch revision 2011-08-17 22:30 ` Junio C Hamano @ 2011-08-17 23:19 ` Jeff King 2011-08-21 22:29 ` Sverre Rabbelier 0 siblings, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread From: Jeff King @ 2011-08-17 23:19 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Junio C Hamano; +Cc: Elijah Newren, Owen Stephens, git, Sverre Rabbelier On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 03:30:14PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > You can think of "fast-export" an off-line "push" command [*1*]; instead > of giving a random commit object, e.g. "git fast-export HEAD~1", that can > not be used as a ref, you can use the refspec notation to tell where the > result should go, e.g. "git fast-export HEAD~1:refs/heads/a-bit-older", > from the command line of fast-export. > > I suspect that also may clarify what Sverre was trying to do in his recent > series. The root cause of both this and the issue Sverre wanted to fix is > the design mistake of fast-export that tries to reuse the notation of > object range specification for a different purpose of telling which "ref" > to update, I think. Yes, this was the conclusion I came to when I looked at this a month or so ago. You really need to give fast-export a mapping of objects to refnames, and it should output ref names _only_ for the mapping. That would handle this "not a ref" case, but would also let you push "refs/heads/foo" when it is equivalent to "refs/heads/master", without fast-export mentioning "refs/heads/master" at all. -Peff ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: Malformed branch name in fast-export when specifying non-HEAD/branch revision 2011-08-17 23:19 ` Jeff King @ 2011-08-21 22:29 ` Sverre Rabbelier 2011-08-22 16:19 ` Jeff King 0 siblings, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread From: Sverre Rabbelier @ 2011-08-21 22:29 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jeff King; +Cc: Junio C Hamano, Elijah Newren, Owen Stephens, git Heya, On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 16:19, Jeff King <peff@peff.net> wrote: > On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 03:30:14PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > >> You can think of "fast-export" an off-line "push" command [*1*]; instead >> of giving a random commit object, e.g. "git fast-export HEAD~1", that can >> not be used as a ref, you can use the refspec notation to tell where the >> result should go, e.g. "git fast-export HEAD~1:refs/heads/a-bit-older", >> from the command line of fast-export. >> >> I suspect that also may clarify what Sverre was trying to do in his recent >> series. The root cause of both this and the issue Sverre wanted to fix is >> the design mistake of fast-export that tries to reuse the notation of >> object range specification for a different purpose of telling which "ref" >> to update, I think. > > Yes, this was the conclusion I came to when I looked at this a month or > so ago. You really need to give fast-export a mapping of objects to > refnames, and it should output ref names _only_ for the mapping. That > would handle this "not a ref" case, but would also let you push > "refs/heads/foo" when it is equivalent to "refs/heads/master", without > fast-export mentioning "refs/heads/master" at all. Does this bring any new insights into how the problem I was pointing out (trying to push next if master points at the same commit does nothing) could/should be solved? -- Cheers, Sverre Rabbelier ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: Malformed branch name in fast-export when specifying non-HEAD/branch revision 2011-08-21 22:29 ` Sverre Rabbelier @ 2011-08-22 16:19 ` Jeff King 2011-08-22 16:54 ` Sverre Rabbelier 0 siblings, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread From: Jeff King @ 2011-08-22 16:19 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Sverre Rabbelier; +Cc: Junio C Hamano, Elijah Newren, Owen Stephens, git On Sun, Aug 21, 2011 at 03:29:38PM -0700, Sverre Rabbelier wrote: > > Yes, this was the conclusion I came to when I looked at this a month or > > so ago. You really need to give fast-export a mapping of objects to > > refnames, and it should output ref names _only_ for the mapping. That > > would handle this "not a ref" case, but would also let you push > > "refs/heads/foo" when it is equivalent to "refs/heads/master", without > > fast-export mentioning "refs/heads/master" at all. > > Does this bring any new insights into how the problem I was pointing > out (trying to push next if master points at the same commit does > nothing) could/should be solved? Hmm. Maybe I am misremembering the problem, but I thought that worked already. If you say: git fast-export refs/heads/foo you should get only reset/commit lines in the output for refs/heads/foo, no? Now I can't seem to replicate the case where refs/heads/master is mentioned, but you didn't want it to be. I may have to go back and re-read the thread from a month or two ago when we discussed these issues. -Peff ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: Malformed branch name in fast-export when specifying non-HEAD/branch revision 2011-08-22 16:19 ` Jeff King @ 2011-08-22 16:54 ` Sverre Rabbelier 2011-08-22 17:57 ` Jeff King 0 siblings, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread From: Sverre Rabbelier @ 2011-08-22 16:54 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jeff King; +Cc: Junio C Hamano, Elijah Newren, Owen Stephens, git Heya, On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 09:19, Jeff King <peff@peff.net> wrote: > Hmm. Maybe I am misremembering the problem, but I thought that worked > already. If you say: > > git fast-export refs/heads/foo > > you should get only reset/commit lines in the output for refs/heads/foo, > no? > > Now I can't seem to replicate the case where refs/heads/master is > mentioned, but you didn't want it to be. I may have to go back and > re-read the thread from a month or two ago when we discussed these > issues. Do you agree that this is expected behavior? $ git init test Initialized empty Git repository in /home/sverre/code/test/.git/ $ cd test/ $ echo content >> foo sverre@laptop-sverre:~/code/test $ git add foo $ git commit -m first [master (root-commit) 821176f] first 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) create mode 100644 foo $ echo content >> foo $ git commit -am second [master 1934282] second 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) $ git branch other $ git fast-export ^master other reset refs/heads/other from 1934282469e3a83a5ef827fd31e074cfb4f3eadf Because in current git.git, this doesn't work (the above is generated using a git that has the patch series Dscho and I sent out). Current git will instead do the following: $ git fast-export ^master other reset refs/heads/other from :0 The 'from :0' here is obviously a bug (which is fixed by our patch series). You might wonder, 'why would anyone do that', well, for example, they might be using marks: $ git fast-export --export-marks=marksfile master > /dev/null $ git fast-export --import-marks=marksfile other reset refs/heads/other from :4 Again, the above is generated with my patched git, current git.git simply outputs nothing. $ git fast-export --import-marks=marksfile other -- Cheers, Sverre Rabbelier ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: Malformed branch name in fast-export when specifying non-HEAD/branch revision 2011-08-22 16:54 ` Sverre Rabbelier @ 2011-08-22 17:57 ` Jeff King 2011-08-22 18:05 ` Sverre Rabbelier 2011-08-22 21:27 ` Junio C Hamano 0 siblings, 2 replies; 11+ messages in thread From: Jeff King @ 2011-08-22 17:57 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Sverre Rabbelier; +Cc: Junio C Hamano, Elijah Newren, Owen Stephens, git On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 09:54:47AM -0700, Sverre Rabbelier wrote: > Do you agree that this is expected behavior? > > $ git init test > Initialized empty Git repository in /home/sverre/code/test/.git/ > $ cd test/ > $ echo content >> foo > sverre@laptop-sverre:~/code/test > $ git add foo > $ git commit -m first > [master (root-commit) 821176f] first > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > create mode 100644 foo > $ echo content >> foo > $ git commit -am second > [master 1934282] second > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > $ git branch other > $ git fast-export ^master other > reset refs/heads/other > from 1934282469e3a83a5ef827fd31e074cfb4f3eadf Yeah, that seems reasonable to me. > Because in current git.git, this doesn't work (the above is generated > using a git that has the patch series Dscho and I sent out). Current > git will instead do the following: > > $ git fast-export ^master other > reset refs/heads/other > from :0 > > The 'from :0' here is obviously a bug (which is fixed by our patch series). Yep, the current behavior is definitely wrong. But I thought your question was about accidentally mentioning refs/heads/master, which this doesn't do (nor should it). I just read through the remote-helper threads from early June, and the only mention of triggering that is when you actually have a rename (i.e., your "refs/heads/foo" becomes remote's "refs/heads/bar", but we mention "refs/heads/foo" in the export stream). I was thinking there was another case, but I couldn't find mention of it. > You might wonder, 'why would anyone do that', well, for example, they > might be using marks: > > $ git fast-export --export-marks=marksfile master > /dev/null > $ git fast-export --import-marks=marksfile other > reset refs/heads/other > from :4 > > Again, the above is generated with my patched git, current git.git > simply outputs nothing. > > $ git fast-export --import-marks=marksfile other Yeah, the behavior of your patch looks fine to me. I thought the point in contention was that having export understand refspecs would fix a lot of _other_ cases, too. -Peff ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: Malformed branch name in fast-export when specifying non-HEAD/branch revision 2011-08-22 17:57 ` Jeff King @ 2011-08-22 18:05 ` Sverre Rabbelier 2011-08-22 21:27 ` Junio C Hamano 1 sibling, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread From: Sverre Rabbelier @ 2011-08-22 18:05 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jeff King; +Cc: Junio C Hamano, Elijah Newren, Owen Stephens, git Heya, On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 10:57, Jeff King <peff@peff.net> wrote: > I just read through the remote-helper threads from early June, and the > only mention of triggering that is when you actually have a rename > (i.e., your "refs/heads/foo" becomes remote's "refs/heads/bar", but we > mention "refs/heads/foo" in the export stream). I was thinking there was > another case, but I couldn't find mention of it. The patches Dscho and I sent are in response to the RFC patches (that are currently "stalled" in whats-cooking) I added on top of the series that rerolled yours. > Yeah, the behavior of your patch looks fine to me. I thought the point > in contention was that having export understand refspecs would fix a lot > of _other_ cases, too. Right. Sadly it doesn't look like I'll have time to try and fix 'git bundle' anytime soon, so this'll remain broken. -- Cheers, Sverre Rabbelier ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: Malformed branch name in fast-export when specifying non-HEAD/branch revision 2011-08-22 17:57 ` Jeff King 2011-08-22 18:05 ` Sverre Rabbelier @ 2011-08-22 21:27 ` Junio C Hamano 2011-08-22 21:32 ` Jeff King 1 sibling, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread From: Junio C Hamano @ 2011-08-22 21:27 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jeff King Cc: Sverre Rabbelier, Junio C Hamano, Elijah Newren, Owen Stephens, git Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes: > Yeah, the behavior of your patch looks fine to me. I thought the point > in contention was that having export understand refspecs would fix a lot > of _other_ cases, too. Perhaps if we added refspecs we could cover other cases, too, but I do not think we need to require the patch to cover additional cases. The more problematic was that the particular implementation in the patch smelled bad. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: Malformed branch name in fast-export when specifying non-HEAD/branch revision 2011-08-22 21:27 ` Junio C Hamano @ 2011-08-22 21:32 ` Jeff King 0 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread From: Jeff King @ 2011-08-22 21:32 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Junio C Hamano; +Cc: Sverre Rabbelier, Elijah Newren, Owen Stephens, git On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 02:27:00PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes: > > > Yeah, the behavior of your patch looks fine to me. I thought the point > > in contention was that having export understand refspecs would fix a lot > > of _other_ cases, too. > > Perhaps if we added refspecs we could cover other cases, too, but I do not > think we need to require the patch to cover additional cases. The more > problematic was that the particular implementation in the patch smelled > bad. OK. I didn't look at that at all. I just wanted to express my support for "refspecs would solve other problems, too". :) -Peff ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2011-08-22 21:32 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <CAORuUR1viqG27+dYOFS_5SLxFOE2wHJqAQ3i3RByg_fbWACh-Q@mail.gmail.com>
2011-08-17 16:21 ` Malformed branch name in fast-export when specifying non-HEAD/branch revision Owen Stephens
2011-08-17 19:36 ` Elijah Newren
2011-08-17 22:30 ` Junio C Hamano
2011-08-17 23:19 ` Jeff King
2011-08-21 22:29 ` Sverre Rabbelier
2011-08-22 16:19 ` Jeff King
2011-08-22 16:54 ` Sverre Rabbelier
2011-08-22 17:57 ` Jeff King
2011-08-22 18:05 ` Sverre Rabbelier
2011-08-22 21:27 ` Junio C Hamano
2011-08-22 21:32 ` Jeff King
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).