From: Michael J Gruber <michael@grubix.eu>
To: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, hIpPy <hippy2981@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] merge: save merge state earlier
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2017 11:36:13 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <36bea69b-010a-9542-ec87-38b00d2bb009@grubix.eu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <xmqqk21w4et2.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>
Junio C Hamano venit, vidit, dixit 22.08.2017 02:38:
> Michael J Gruber <git@grubix.eu> writes:
>
>> static void prepare_to_commit(struct commit_list *remoteheads)
>> {
>> struct strbuf msg = STRBUF_INIT;
>> @@ -767,6 +768,8 @@ static void prepare_to_commit(struct commit_list *remoteheads)
>> strbuf_commented_addf(&msg, _(merge_editor_comment), comment_line_char);
>> if (signoff)
>> append_signoff(&msg, ignore_non_trailer(msg.buf, msg.len), 0);
>> + if (!squash)
>> + write_merge_heads(remoteheads);
>> write_file_buf(git_path_merge_msg(), msg.buf, msg.len);
>> if (run_commit_hook(0 < option_edit, get_index_file(), "prepare-commit-msg",
>> git_path_merge_msg(), "merge", NULL))
>
> I can understand that you would never want to write out MERGE_HEAD
> while squashing, but I somehow think it would be a bug in the caller
> to call prepare_to_commit(), whose point is to prepare the merge
> message to be recorded in the resulting merge commit, when the user
> gave us the "--squash" option, which is an explicit instruction that
> the user does not want the merge commit the message is used.
That sounds reasonable. I vaguely remember a failing test for an earlier
version that I tried, but that was before the "split".
> Can squash ever be true in this function?
>
> This function has two callsites: merge_trivial() and
> finish_automerge().
>
> I think merge_trivial() will not be called under "--squash", which
> turns option_commit off and the only callsite of it is inside an
> else-if clause that requres option_commit to be true. You can do a
> similar deduction around the "automerge_was_ok" variable to see if
> finish_automerge() can be called when "--squash" is given; I suspect
> the answer may be no.
I'll go without the if, after more testing.
>> diff --git a/t/t7600-merge.sh b/t/t7600-merge.sh
>> index 2ebda509ac..80194b79f9 100755
>> --- a/t/t7600-merge.sh
>> +++ b/t/t7600-merge.sh
>> @@ -774,4 +774,19 @@ test_expect_success 'merge can be completed with --continue' '
>> verify_parents $c0 $c1
>> '
>>
>> +write_script .git/FAKE_EDITOR <<EOF
>> +# kill -TERM command added below.
>> +EOF
>> +
>> +test_expect_success EXECKEEPSPID 'killed merge can be completed with --continue' '
>> + git reset --hard c0 &&
>> + ! "$SHELL_PATH" -c '\''
>> + echo kill -TERM $$ >> .git/FAKE_EDITOR
>> + GIT_EDITOR=.git/FAKE_EDITOR
>> + export GIT_EDITOR
>> + exec git merge --no-ff --edit c1'\'' &&
>
> This is a tricky construct. You "reserve" a process ID by using a
> shell, arrange it to be killed and then using "exec" to make it the
> "git merge" program to be killed. I kind of like the convolutedness.
That is from t7502. Sorry for hiding that note in the cover letter, I
should put it into 3/3's message or a test comment.
When testing, I simply used "git merge... &" and "ps" or "jobs" to know
which process to kill. Apparantly, the above is the most portable way to
script that. t7502 went through a few iterations to ensure this.
>> + git merge --continue &&
>> + verify_parents $c0 $c1
>> +'
>> +
>> test_done
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-08-22 9:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-08-18 22:35 Git makes a merge commit but as a normal (non-merge) commit hIpPy
2017-08-21 10:03 ` Michael J Gruber
2017-08-21 10:06 ` [PATCH] merge: save merge state earlier Michael J Gruber
2017-08-21 12:53 ` [PATCH v2 0/3] Keep merge during kills Michael J Gruber
2017-08-21 12:53 ` [PATCH v2 1/3] Documentation/git-merge: explain --continue Michael J Gruber
2017-08-21 16:43 ` Martin Ågren
2017-08-22 9:26 ` Michael J Gruber
2017-08-22 10:06 ` Martin Ågren
2017-08-22 15:24 ` hIpPy
2017-08-22 16:11 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-08-23 12:10 ` [PATCH v3 0/4] Keep merge during kills Michael J Gruber
2017-08-23 12:10 ` [PATCH v3 1/4] Documentation/git-merge: explain --continue Michael J Gruber
2017-08-23 12:10 ` [PATCH v3 2/4] merge: clarify call chain Michael J Gruber
2017-08-23 12:10 ` [PATCH v3 3/4] merge: split write_merge_state in two Michael J Gruber
2017-08-23 12:10 ` [PATCH v3 4/4] merge: save merge state earlier Michael J Gruber
2017-08-22 0:20 ` [PATCH v2 1/3] Documentation/git-merge: explain --continue Junio C Hamano
2017-08-21 12:53 ` [PATCH v2 2/3] merge: split write_merge_state in two Michael J Gruber
2017-08-22 0:20 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-08-21 12:53 ` [PATCH v2 3/3] merge: save merge state earlier Michael J Gruber
2017-08-22 0:38 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-08-22 9:36 ` Michael J Gruber [this message]
2017-08-22 16:03 ` Junio C Hamano
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=36bea69b-010a-9542-ec87-38b00d2bb009@grubix.eu \
--to=michael@grubix.eu \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=hippy2981@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
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).