* Re: [PATCH] Add --continue and --abort options to git-rebase.
From: sean @ 2006-04-27 5:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Junio C Hamano; +Cc: git
In-Reply-To: <7v3bg0nlvb.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>
On Wed, 26 Apr 2006 13:05:28 -0700
Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net> wrote:
> sean <seanlkml@sympatico.ca> writes:
>
> > git rebase [--onto <newbase>] <upstream> [<branch>]
> > git rebase --continue
> > git rebase --abort
> >
> > ---
> >
> > Take 2. Must simpler patch which doesn't trying to
> > rejigger the command line too much.
>
> This second round seems to make more sense. Sign-off?
>
Sure,
Signed-off-by: Sean Estabrooks <seanlkml@sympatico.ca>
Sean
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: [PATCH/RFC] reverse the pack-objects delta window logic
From: Junio C Hamano @ 2006-04-27 5:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Nicolas Pitre; +Cc: git
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0604262210120.18520@localhost.localdomain>
Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org> writes:
>> And actually I'm not sure how to solve that without walking the tree
>> up to the top each time, which I want to avoid as much as possible.
>
> Well, that seems to be unavoidable.
>
> Reversing the window logic isn't that much of a good idea after all.
> ...
> Then there is the possibility of having a delta "branch" with maximum
> depth meaning that the trunk for that branch may not be deltified. But
> if a later objects to come does constitute a better delta base for the
> object in the middle of that branch then the branch will be broken in
> the middle to be transplanted onto the new base as explained previously.
> Which means that the initial trunk no longer has a maximum depth and some
> objects that were skipped because of the depth limit could now have been
> tested, leading to suboptimal delta matching.
Good analysis, and I tend to agree with your conclusion.
BTW, Geert mentioned on the #git channel that about half the
filepair git-pack-objects asks diff_delta() to try have long
sequences of matching bytes at the beginning and at the end. It
might be worthwhile if we can take an advantage of it, whichever
delta algorithm we would use.
^ permalink raw reply
* [PATCH] use delta index data when finding best delta matches
From: Nicolas Pitre @ 2006-04-27 3:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Junio C Hamano; +Cc: git
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0604262210120.18520@localhost.localdomain>
This patch allows for computing the delta index for each base object
only once and reuse it when trying to find the best delta match.
This should set the mark and pave the way for possibly better delta
generator algorithms.
Signed-off-by: Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org>
---
... as mentioned in my previous post
diff --git a/pack-objects.c b/pack-objects.c
index c0acc46..5b2ef9a 100644
--- a/pack-objects.c
+++ b/pack-objects.c
@@ -994,6 +994,7 @@ static int type_size_sort(const struct o
struct unpacked {
struct object_entry *entry;
void *data;
+ struct delta_index *index;
};
/*
@@ -1004,64 +1005,56 @@ struct unpacked {
* more importantly, the bigger file is likely the more recent
* one.
*/
-static int try_delta(struct unpacked *cur, struct unpacked *old, unsigned max_depth)
+static int try_delta(struct unpacked *trg, struct unpacked *src,
+ struct delta_index *src_index, unsigned max_depth)
{
- struct object_entry *cur_entry = cur->entry;
- struct object_entry *old_entry = old->entry;
- unsigned long size, oldsize, delta_size, sizediff;
- long max_size;
+ struct object_entry *trg_entry = trg->entry;
+ struct object_entry *src_entry = src->entry;
+ unsigned long size, src_size, delta_size, sizediff, max_size;
void *delta_buf;
/* Don't bother doing diffs between different types */
- if (cur_entry->type != old_entry->type)
+ if (trg_entry->type != src_entry->type)
return -1;
/* We do not compute delta to *create* objects we are not
* going to pack.
*/
- if (cur_entry->preferred_base)
+ if (trg_entry->preferred_base)
return -1;
- /* If the current object is at pack edge, take the depth the
+ /*
+ * If the current object is at pack edge, take the depth the
* objects that depend on the current object into account --
* otherwise they would become too deep.
*/
- if (cur_entry->delta_child) {
- if (max_depth <= cur_entry->delta_limit)
+ if (trg_entry->delta_child) {
+ if (max_depth <= trg_entry->delta_limit)
return 0;
- max_depth -= cur_entry->delta_limit;
+ max_depth -= trg_entry->delta_limit;
}
-
- size = cur_entry->size;
- oldsize = old_entry->size;
- sizediff = oldsize > size ? oldsize - size : size - oldsize;
-
- if (size < 50)
- return -1;
- if (old_entry->depth >= max_depth)
+ if (src_entry->depth >= max_depth)
return 0;
- /*
- * NOTE!
- *
- * We always delta from the bigger to the smaller, since that's
- * more space-efficient (deletes don't have to say _what_ they
- * delete).
- */
+ /* Now some size filtering euristics. */
+ size = trg_entry->size;
max_size = size / 2 - 20;
- if (cur_entry->delta)
- max_size = cur_entry->delta_size-1;
+ if (trg_entry->delta)
+ max_size = trg_entry->delta_size-1;
+ src_size = src_entry->size;
+ sizediff = src_size < size ? size - src_size : 0;
if (sizediff >= max_size)
return 0;
- delta_buf = diff_delta(old->data, oldsize,
- cur->data, size, &delta_size, max_size);
+
+ delta_buf = create_delta(src_index, trg->data, size, &delta_size, max_size);
if (!delta_buf)
return 0;
- cur_entry->delta = old_entry;
- cur_entry->delta_size = delta_size;
- cur_entry->depth = old_entry->depth + 1;
+
+ trg_entry->delta = src_entry;
+ trg_entry->delta_size = delta_size;
+ trg_entry->depth = src_entry->depth + 1;
free(delta_buf);
- return 0;
+ return 1;
}
static void progress_interval(int signum)
@@ -1109,11 +1102,19 @@ static void find_deltas(struct object_en
*/
continue;
+ if (entry->size < 50)
+ continue;
+ if (n->index)
+ free_delta_index(n->index);
free(n->data);
n->entry = entry;
n->data = read_sha1_file(entry->sha1, type, &size);
if (size != entry->size)
- die("object %s inconsistent object length (%lu vs %lu)", sha1_to_hex(entry->sha1), size, entry->size);
+ die("object %s inconsistent object length (%lu vs %lu)",
+ sha1_to_hex(entry->sha1), size, entry->size);
+ n->index = create_delta_index(n->data, size);
+ if (!n->index)
+ die("out of memory");
j = window;
while (--j > 0) {
@@ -1124,7 +1125,7 @@ static void find_deltas(struct object_en
m = array + other_idx;
if (!m->entry)
break;
- if (try_delta(n, m, depth) < 0)
+ if (try_delta(n, m, m->index, depth) < 0)
break;
}
#if 0
@@ -1144,8 +1145,11 @@ #endif
if (progress)
fputc('\n', stderr);
- for (i = 0; i < window; ++i)
+ for (i = 0; i < window; ++i) {
+ if (array[i].index)
+ free_delta_index(array[i].index);
free(array[i].data);
+ }
free(array);
}
^ permalink raw reply related
* Re: [PATCH/RFC] reverse the pack-objects delta window logic
From: Nicolas Pitre @ 2006-04-27 3:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Junio C Hamano; +Cc: git
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0604261341200.18520@localhost.localdomain>
On Wed, 26 Apr 2006, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> On Tue, 25 Apr 2006, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
> > Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org> writes:
> >
> > > Note, this is a RFC particularly to Junio since the resulting pack is
> > > larger than without the patch with git-repack -a -f. However using a
> > > subsequent git-repack -a brings the pack size down to expected size. So
> > > I'm not sure I've got everything right.
> >
> > I haven't tested it seriously yet, but there is nothing that
> > looks obviously wrong that might cause the inflation problem,
> > from the cursory look after applying the patch on top of your
> > last round.
>
> Never mind. I found a flaw in the determination of delta_limit when
> reparenting a delta target. The immediate parent's delta_limit is
> readjusted when its longest delta is moved to another base, but if that
> parent was itself a delta then the delta_limit adjustment is not
> propagated back up to the top. This means that some objects were
> falsely credited with too high delta_limit.
>
> And actually I'm not sure how to solve that without walking the tree
> up to the top each time, which I want to avoid as much as possible.
Well, that seems to be unavoidable.
Reversing the window logic isn't that much of a good idea after all. As
soon as we need to control the delta depth we sorta need to maintain
trees of deltas and those trees are built from leaves up to the trunk.
But each new object in the list is then used as a possible
new base for previously created deltas still in the object window. When
the new base is determined to produce a better delta then the
relationship with the old base must be broken, which means that the
information about delta length for the old base has to be updated. And
if the detached delta chain was the longest for that old base then the
remaining longest delta chain from that old base has to be found and
that information reflected up to the ultimate base in that tree. And
doing so isn't necessarily trivial as can be seen in the patch below.
Then there is the possibility of having a delta "branch" with maximum
depth meaning that the trunk for that branch may not be deltified. But
if a later objects to come does constitute a better delta base for the
object in the middle of that branch then the branch will be broken in
the middle to be transplanted onto the new base as explained previously.
Which means that the initial trunk no longer has a maximum
depth and
some objects that were skipped because of the depth limit could
now have been tested, leading to suboptimal delta matching. This is why
running pack-objects a second time improved things as it picked up
those missed delta opportunities. But having to run pack-objects
multiple times is a bit against the point, and even if pack-objects
processed the object list multiple times it certainly won't be
faster than the current code.
In short, trying to deltify objects by keeping the base object constant
for the match window really sucks, even from a theoretical point of
view. It does produce sensibly larger
packs and it does take longer to do so. I'm therefore dropping that
approach. My current patch can be found below. If someone
smarter than me (there are plenty I'm sure) can come with improvements
to it then be my guest.
Therefore I really think the best approach is to simply keep delta index
data along with object data in the match window and keep the current
window direction for matching. It obviously will take up more memory,
but most probably less than if we set the window size = 20. And
building delta trees from the trunk to the leaves will always be optimal
regardless with no delta rebasing needed. I'll post another patch doing
just that.
---
diff --git a/pack-objects.c b/pack-objects.c
index c0acc46..17280fb 100644
--- a/pack-objects.c
+++ b/pack-objects.c
@@ -19,19 +19,17 @@ struct object_entry {
unsigned long offset; /* offset into the final pack file;
* nonzero if already written.
*/
- unsigned int depth; /* delta depth */
- unsigned int delta_limit; /* base adjustment for in-pack delta */
+ unsigned int delta_limit; /* deepest delta from this object */
unsigned int hash; /* name hint hash */
enum object_type type;
enum object_type in_pack_type; /* could be delta */
unsigned long delta_size; /* delta data size (uncompressed) */
struct object_entry *delta; /* delta base object */
- struct packed_git *in_pack; /* already in pack */
- unsigned int in_pack_offset;
struct object_entry *delta_child; /* delitified objects who bases me */
struct object_entry *delta_sibling; /* other deltified objects who
- * uses the same base as me
- */
+ uses the same base as me */
+ struct packed_git *in_pack; /* already in pack */
+ unsigned int in_pack_offset;
int preferred_base; /* we do not pack this, but is encouraged to
* be used as the base objectto delta huge
* objects against.
@@ -884,17 +882,16 @@ static void check_object(struct object_e
sha1_to_hex(entry->sha1), type);
}
-static unsigned int check_delta_limit(struct object_entry *me, unsigned int n)
+static unsigned int find_delta_limit(struct object_entry *me)
{
struct object_entry *child = me->delta_child;
- unsigned int m = n;
while (child) {
- unsigned int c = check_delta_limit(child, n + 1);
- if (m < c)
- m = c;
+ unsigned int c = find_delta_limit(child);
+ if (me->delta_limit <= c)
+ me->delta_limit = c + 1;
child = child->delta_sibling;
}
- return m;
+ return me->delta_limit;
}
static void get_object_details(void)
@@ -906,11 +903,11 @@ static void get_object_details(void)
for (i = 0, entry = objects; i < nr_objects; i++, entry++)
check_object(entry);
- if (nr_objects == nr_result) {
+ if (!no_reuse_delta && nr_objects == nr_result) {
/*
- * Depth of objects that depend on the entry -- this
- * is subtracted from depth-max to break too deep
- * delta chain because of delta data reusing.
+ * We must determine the maximum depth of reused deltas
+ * for those objects used as their base before find_deltas()
+ * starts considering them as potential delta targets.
* However, we loosen this restriction when we know we
* are creating a thin pack -- it will have to be
* expanded on the other end anyway, so do not
@@ -919,8 +916,7 @@ static void get_object_details(void)
*/
for (i = 0, entry = objects; i < nr_objects; i++, entry++)
if (!entry->delta && entry->delta_child)
- entry->delta_limit =
- check_delta_limit(entry, 1);
+ find_delta_limit(entry);
}
}
@@ -994,6 +990,7 @@ static int type_size_sort(const struct o
struct unpacked {
struct object_entry *entry;
void *data;
+ int pos;
};
/*
@@ -1004,64 +1001,94 @@ struct unpacked {
* more importantly, the bigger file is likely the more recent
* one.
*/
-static int try_delta(struct unpacked *cur, struct unpacked *old, unsigned max_depth)
+static int try_delta(struct unpacked *trg, struct unpacked *src,
+ struct delta_index *src_index, unsigned max_depth)
{
- struct object_entry *cur_entry = cur->entry;
- struct object_entry *old_entry = old->entry;
- unsigned long size, oldsize, delta_size, sizediff;
- long max_size;
+ struct object_entry *trg_entry = trg->entry;
+ struct object_entry *src_entry = src->entry;
+ unsigned long size, src_size, delta_size, sizediff, max_size;
void *delta_buf;
/* Don't bother doing diffs between different types */
- if (cur_entry->type != old_entry->type)
+ if (trg_entry->type != src_entry->type)
return -1;
/* We do not compute delta to *create* objects we are not
* going to pack.
*/
- if (cur_entry->preferred_base)
- return -1;
+ if (trg_entry->preferred_base)
+ return 0;
- /* If the current object is at pack edge, take the depth the
- * objects that depend on the current object into account --
- * otherwise they would become too deep.
+ /*
+ * Make sure deltifying this object won't make its deepest delta
+ * too deep, but only when not producing a thin pack.
*/
- if (cur_entry->delta_child) {
- if (max_depth <= cur_entry->delta_limit)
- return 0;
- max_depth -= cur_entry->delta_limit;
- }
-
- size = cur_entry->size;
- oldsize = old_entry->size;
- sizediff = oldsize > size ? oldsize - size : size - oldsize;
+ if (trg_entry->delta_limit >= max_depth && nr_objects == nr_result)
+ return 0;
+ /* Now some size filtering euristics. */
+ size = trg_entry->size;
if (size < 50)
- return -1;
- if (old_entry->depth >= max_depth)
return 0;
-
- /*
- * NOTE!
- *
- * We always delta from the bigger to the smaller, since that's
- * more space-efficient (deletes don't have to say _what_ they
- * delete).
- */
max_size = size / 2 - 20;
- if (cur_entry->delta)
- max_size = cur_entry->delta_size-1;
+ if (trg_entry->delta)
+ max_size = trg_entry->delta_size-1;
+ src_size = src_entry->size;
+ sizediff = src_size < size ? size - src_size : 0;
if (sizediff >= max_size)
return 0;
- delta_buf = diff_delta(old->data, oldsize,
- cur->data, size, &delta_size, max_size);
+
+ delta_buf = create_delta(src_index, trg->data, size, &delta_size, max_size);
if (!delta_buf)
return 0;
- cur_entry->delta = old_entry;
- cur_entry->delta_size = delta_size;
- cur_entry->depth = old_entry->depth + 1;
+
+ if (trg_entry->delta && nr_objects == nr_result) {
+ /*
+ * The target object already has a delta base but we just
+ * found a better one. Remove it from its former base
+ * childhood and redetermine the base delta_limit.
+ * But again, only when not creating a thin pack.
+ */
+ struct object_entry *base = trg_entry->delta;
+ struct object_entry **child_link = &base->delta_child;
+ unsigned int limit = base->delta_limit;
+ base->delta_limit = 0;
+ while (*child_link) {
+ if (*child_link == trg_entry) {
+ *child_link = trg_entry->delta_sibling;
+ continue;
+ }
+ if (base->delta_limit <= (*child_link)->delta_limit)
+ base->delta_limit =
+ (*child_link)->delta_limit + 1;
+ child_link = &(*child_link)->delta_sibling;
+ }
+ if (base->delta_limit == limit)
+ goto out;
+ while ((base = base->delta) && ++limit == base->delta_limit) {
+ struct object_entry *child = base->delta_child;
+ base->delta_limit = 0;
+ do {
+ if(base->delta_limit <= child->delta_limit) {
+ base->delta_limit =
+ child->delta_limit + 1;
+ if (base->delta_limit == limit)
+ goto out;
+ }
+ child = child->delta_sibling;
+ } while (child);
+ }
+ out:;
+ }
+
+ trg_entry->delta = src_entry;
+ trg_entry->delta_size = delta_size;
+ trg_entry->delta_sibling = src_entry->delta_child;
+ src_entry->delta_child = trg_entry;
+ if (src_entry->delta_limit <= trg_entry->delta_limit)
+ src_entry->delta_limit = trg_entry->delta_limit + 1;
free(delta_buf);
- return 0;
+ return 1;
}
static void progress_interval(int signum)
@@ -1078,14 +1105,15 @@ static void find_deltas(struct object_en
unsigned last_percent = 999;
memset(array, 0, array_size);
- i = nr_objects;
+ i = 0;
idx = 0;
if (progress)
fprintf(stderr, "Deltifying %d objects.\n", nr_result);
- while (--i >= 0) {
- struct object_entry *entry = list[i];
+ while (i < nr_objects) {
+ struct object_entry *entry = list[i++];
struct unpacked *n = array + idx;
+ struct delta_index *delta_index;
unsigned long size;
char type[10];
int j;
@@ -1109,11 +1137,18 @@ static void find_deltas(struct object_en
*/
continue;
+ if (entry->size < 50)
+ continue;
free(n->data);
+ n->pos = i;
n->entry = entry;
n->data = read_sha1_file(entry->sha1, type, &size);
if (size != entry->size)
- die("object %s inconsistent object length (%lu vs %lu)", sha1_to_hex(entry->sha1), size, entry->size);
+ die("object %s inconsistent object length (%lu vs %lu)",
+ sha1_to_hex(entry->sha1), size, entry->size);
+ delta_index = create_delta_index(n->data, size);
+ if (!delta_index)
+ die("out of memory");
j = window;
while (--j > 0) {
@@ -1124,18 +1159,10 @@ static void find_deltas(struct object_en
m = array + other_idx;
if (!m->entry)
break;
- if (try_delta(n, m, depth) < 0)
+ if (try_delta(m, n, delta_index, depth) < 0)
break;
}
-#if 0
- /* if we made n a delta, and if n is already at max
- * depth, leaving it in the window is pointless. we
- * should evict it first.
- * ... in theory only; somehow this makes things worse.
- */
- if (entry->delta && depth <= entry->depth)
- continue;
-#endif
+ free_delta_index(delta_index);
idx++;
if (idx >= window)
idx = 0;
^ permalink raw reply related
* [PATCH] revision parsing: make "rev -- paths" checks stronger.
From: Junio C Hamano @ 2006-04-26 22:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Linus Torvalds; +Cc: git
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0604220921430.3701@g5.osdl.org>
If you don't have a "--" marker, then:
- all of the arguments we are going to assume are pathspecs
must exist in the working tree.
- none of the arguments we parsed as revisions could be
interpreted as a filename.
so that there really isn't any possibility of confusion in case
somebody does have a revision that looks like a pathname too.
The former rule has been in effect; this implements the latter.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
---
* I did not understand 'if you have a pathspec, but' part, and
'none of the paths are "--"' part of your rules, so this
might probably be a bit different from what you had in
mind.
The patch, lacking the "if you have a pathspec" part of the
rule, would make this complain:
$ >v1.0.0
$ git show v1.0.0
BTW, this would silently do what you would not find
interesting, with or without the patch:
$ >v2.9.6
... long time later after you forget you had such a
... bogus file
$ git show v2.9.6
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org> writes:
> ... I was going to say that if you have a pathspec,
> but don't have a "--" marker, then we'd additionally check:
>
> - none of the arguments we parsed as revisions could be interpreted as a
> filename.
>
> - none of the paths are "--"
>
> so that there really isn't...
cache.h | 1 +
revision.c | 14 +++++++++++++-
setup.c | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++++--
3 files changed, 36 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/cache.h b/cache.h
index 4d8fabc..a4f253e 100644
--- a/cache.h
+++ b/cache.h
@@ -135,6 +135,7 @@ extern const char *setup_git_directory(v
extern const char *prefix_path(const char *prefix, int len, const char *path);
extern const char *prefix_filename(const char *prefix, int len, const char *path);
extern void verify_filename(const char *prefix, const char *name);
+extern void verify_non_filename(const char *prefix, const char *name);
#define alloc_nr(x) (((x)+16)*3/2)
diff --git a/revision.c b/revision.c
index f2a9f25..b6ed014 100644
--- a/revision.c
+++ b/revision.c
@@ -740,6 +740,11 @@ int setup_revisions(int argc, const char
include = get_reference(revs, next, sha1, flags);
if (!exclude || !include)
die("Invalid revision range %s..%s", arg, next);
+
+ if (!seen_dashdash) {
+ *dotdot = '.';
+ verify_non_filename(revs->prefix, arg);
+ }
add_pending_object(revs, exclude, this);
add_pending_object(revs, include, next);
continue;
@@ -757,13 +762,20 @@ int setup_revisions(int argc, const char
if (seen_dashdash || local_flags)
die("bad revision '%s'", arg);
- /* If we didn't have a "--", all filenames must exist */
+ /* If we didn't have a "--":
+ * (1) all filenames must exist;
+ * (2) all rev-args must not be interpretable
+ * as a valid filename.
+ * but the latter we have checked in the main loop.
+ */
for (j = i; j < argc; j++)
verify_filename(revs->prefix, argv[j]);
revs->prune_data = get_pathspec(revs->prefix, argv + i);
break;
}
+ if (!seen_dashdash)
+ verify_non_filename(revs->prefix, arg);
object = get_reference(revs, arg, sha1, flags ^ local_flags);
add_pending_object(revs, object, arg);
}
diff --git a/setup.c b/setup.c
index cce9bb8..fe7f884 100644
--- a/setup.c
+++ b/setup.c
@@ -80,11 +80,31 @@ void verify_filename(const char *prefix,
if (!lstat(name, &st))
return;
if (errno == ENOENT)
- die("ambiguous argument '%s': unknown revision or filename\n"
- "Use '--' to separate filenames from revisions", arg);
+ die("ambiguous argument '%s': unknown revision or path not in the working tree.\n"
+ "Use '--' to separate paths from revisions", arg);
die("'%s': %s", arg, strerror(errno));
}
+/*
+ * Opposite of the above: the command line did not have -- marker
+ * and we parsed the arg as a refname. It should not be interpretable
+ * as a filename.
+ */
+void verify_non_filename(const char *prefix, const char *arg)
+{
+ const char *name;
+ struct stat st;
+
+ if (*arg == '-')
+ return; /* flag */
+ name = prefix ? prefix_filename(prefix, strlen(prefix), arg) : arg;
+ if (!lstat(name, &st))
+ die("ambiguous argument '%s': both revision and filename\n"
+ "Use '--' to separate filenames from revisions", arg);
+ if (errno != ENOENT)
+ die("'%s': %s", arg, strerror(errno));
+}
+
const char **get_pathspec(const char *prefix, const char **pathspec)
{
const char *entry = *pathspec;
--
1.3.1.ga6c7
^ permalink raw reply related
* Re: [PATCH] send-email: Change from Mail::Sendmail to Net::SMTP
From: Martin Langhoff @ 2006-04-26 20:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Junio C Hamano; +Cc: Eric Wong, git, Ryan Anderson
In-Reply-To: <7vy7xsm6qa.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>
On 4/27/06, Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net> wrote:
> > system that we don't need an smtp daemon. Net::SMTP doesn't know how
> > to use /usr/bin/sendmail
> Wouldn't --smtp-server=that.smtp.server work for you? Ah, that
> would not work if your use is to send a local mail. Hmph...
Well, the machine knows that the smtp server is (I mean, files in /etc
have the right values in them), but I don't think often about it. Only
when I am installing OSs or MTAs...
I know... I'm a whiner! ;-) I'll probably do something that does an
eval and tries Mail::Sendmail and post it.
martin
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: [PATCH] send-email: Change from Mail::Sendmail to Net::SMTP
From: Junio C Hamano @ 2006-04-26 20:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Martin Langhoff; +Cc: Eric Wong, Junio C Hamano, git, Ryan Anderson
In-Reply-To: <46a038f90604251745u1b15ad99ka1aeff1cd8d8c344@mail.gmail.com>
"Martin Langhoff" <martin.langhoff@gmail.com> writes:
> * This box has nothing listening on port 25. It doesn't get email
> from the net, being a LAN machine, so I've told the debian config
> system that we don't need an smtp daemon. Net::SMTP doesn't know how
> to use /usr/bin/sendmail
Wouldn't --smtp-server=that.smtp.server work for you? Ah, that
would not work if your use is to send a local mail. Hmph...
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: [PATCH] Add --continue and --abort options to git-rebase.
From: Junio C Hamano @ 2006-04-26 20:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: sean; +Cc: git
In-Reply-To: <BAYC1-PASMTP025110BEB495EC4F07CDE2AEBC0@CEZ.ICE>
sean <seanlkml@sympatico.ca> writes:
> git rebase [--onto <newbase>] <upstream> [<branch>]
> git rebase --continue
> git rebase --abort
>
> ---
>
> Take 2. Must simpler patch which doesn't trying to
> rejigger the command line too much.
This second round seems to make more sense. Sign-off?
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: [PATCH] Fix filename verification when in a subdirectory
From: Linus Torvalds @ 2006-04-26 18:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Timo Hirvonen; +Cc: junkio, matled, git, paulus
In-Reply-To: <20060426210541.5e145e88.tihirvon@gmail.com>
On Wed, 26 Apr 2006, Timo Hirvonen wrote:
>
> Extra semicolon.
Duh, indeed. It just didn't show up in any of the normal cases.
Junio, just apply without that stupid semicolon..
Linus
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: [PATCH] Fix filename verification when in a subdirectory
From: Timo Hirvonen @ 2006-04-26 18:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: torvalds; +Cc: junkio, matled, git, paulus
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0604261010390.3701@g5.osdl.org>
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org> wrote:
> +void verify_filename(const char *prefix, const char *arg)
> +{
> + const char *name;
> + struct stat st;
> +
> + if (*arg == '-')
> + die("bad flag '%s' used after filename", arg);
> + name = prefix ? prefix_filename(prefix, strlen(prefix), arg) : arg;
> + if (!lstat(name, &st))
> + return;
> + if (errno == ENOENT);
Extra semicolon.
--
http://onion.dynserv.net/~timo/
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: [PATCH/RFC] reverse the pack-objects delta window logic
From: Nicolas Pitre @ 2006-04-26 17:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Junio C Hamano; +Cc: git
In-Reply-To: <7vpsj4sxer.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>
On Tue, 25 Apr 2006, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org> writes:
>
> > Note, this is a RFC particularly to Junio since the resulting pack is
> > larger than without the patch with git-repack -a -f. However using a
> > subsequent git-repack -a brings the pack size down to expected size. So
> > I'm not sure I've got everything right.
>
> I haven't tested it seriously yet, but there is nothing that
> looks obviously wrong that might cause the inflation problem,
> from the cursory look after applying the patch on top of your
> last round.
Never mind. I found a flaw in the determination of delta_limit when
reparenting a delta target. The immediate parent's delta_limit is
readjusted when its longest delta is moved to another base, but if that
parent was itself a delta then the delta_limit adjustment is not
propagated back up to the top. This means that some objects were
falsely credited with too high delta_limit.
And actually I'm not sure how to solve that without walking the tree
up to the top each time, which I want to avoid as much as possible.
Nicolas
^ permalink raw reply
* [PATCH] Fix filename verification when in a subdirectory
From: Linus Torvalds @ 2006-04-26 17:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Junio C Hamano, Matthias Lederhofer; +Cc: Git Mailing List, Paul Mackerras
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0604260832240.3701@g5.osdl.org>
When we are in a subdirectory of a git archive, we need to take the prefix
of that subdirectory into accoung when we verify filename arguments.
Noted by Matthias Lederhofer
This also uses the improved error reporting for all the other git commands
that use the revision parsing interfaces, not just git-rev-parse. Also, it
makes the error reporting for mixed filenames and argument flags clearer
(you cannot put flags after the start of the pathname list).
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
---
On Wed, 26 Apr 2006, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> >
> > Shouldn't git rev-parse try to stat the file (additionally?) in the
> > current directory instead of the top git directory? git (diff|log|..)
> > seem to fail everytime in a subdirectory without --.
>
> Good point. However, the reason for that is that it actually _does_ stat
> the file in the current directory, but it has done the
>
> revs->prefix = setup_git_directory();
>
> in the init path (and it does need to do that, since that's what figures
> out where the .git directory is, so that we can parse the revisions
> correctly).
>
> And that "setup_git_directory()" will chdir() to the root of the project.
diff --git a/cache.h b/cache.h
index 69801b0..4d8fabc 100644
--- a/cache.h
+++ b/cache.h
@@ -134,6 +134,7 @@ extern const char *setup_git_directory_g
extern const char *setup_git_directory(void);
extern const char *prefix_path(const char *prefix, int len, const char *path);
extern const char *prefix_filename(const char *prefix, int len, const char *path);
+extern void verify_filename(const char *prefix, const char *name);
#define alloc_nr(x) (((x)+16)*3/2)
diff --git a/rev-parse.c b/rev-parse.c
index 7f66ae2..62e16af 100644
--- a/rev-parse.c
+++ b/rev-parse.c
@@ -160,14 +160,6 @@ static int show_file(const char *arg)
return 0;
}
-static void die_badfile(const char *arg)
-{
- if (errno != ENOENT)
- die("'%s': %s", arg, strerror(errno));
- die("'%s' is ambiguous - revision name or file/directory name?\n"
- "Please put '--' before the list of filenames.", arg);
-}
-
int main(int argc, char **argv)
{
int i, as_is = 0, verify = 0;
@@ -177,14 +169,12 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv)
git_config(git_default_config);
for (i = 1; i < argc; i++) {
- struct stat st;
char *arg = argv[i];
char *dotdot;
if (as_is) {
if (show_file(arg) && as_is < 2)
- if (lstat(arg, &st) < 0)
- die_badfile(arg);
+ verify_filename(prefix, arg);
continue;
}
if (!strcmp(arg,"-n")) {
@@ -350,8 +340,7 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv)
continue;
if (verify)
die("Needed a single revision");
- if (lstat(arg, &st) < 0)
- die_badfile(arg);
+ verify_filename(prefix, arg);
}
show_default();
if (verify && revs_count != 1)
diff --git a/revision.c b/revision.c
index f9c7d15..f2a9f25 100644
--- a/revision.c
+++ b/revision.c
@@ -752,17 +752,15 @@ int setup_revisions(int argc, const char
arg++;
}
if (get_sha1(arg, sha1) < 0) {
- struct stat st;
int j;
if (seen_dashdash || local_flags)
die("bad revision '%s'", arg);
/* If we didn't have a "--", all filenames must exist */
- for (j = i; j < argc; j++) {
- if (lstat(argv[j], &st) < 0)
- die("'%s': %s", argv[j], strerror(errno));
- }
+ for (j = i; j < argc; j++)
+ verify_filename(revs->prefix, argv[j]);
+
revs->prune_data = get_pathspec(revs->prefix, argv + i);
break;
}
diff --git a/setup.c b/setup.c
index 36ede3d..119ef7d 100644
--- a/setup.c
+++ b/setup.c
@@ -62,6 +62,29 @@ const char *prefix_filename(const char *
return path;
}
+/*
+ * Verify a filename that we got as an argument for a pathspec
+ * entry. Note that a filename that begins with "-" never verifies
+ * as true, because even if such a filename were to exist, we want
+ * it to be preceded by the "--" marker (or we want the user to
+ * use a format like "./-filename")
+ */
+void verify_filename(const char *prefix, const char *arg)
+{
+ const char *name;
+ struct stat st;
+
+ if (*arg == '-')
+ die("bad flag '%s' used after filename", arg);
+ name = prefix ? prefix_filename(prefix, strlen(prefix), arg) : arg;
+ if (!lstat(name, &st))
+ return;
+ if (errno == ENOENT);
+ die("ambiguous argument '%s': unknown revision or filename\n"
+ "Use '--' to separate filenames from revisions", arg);
+ die("'%s': %s", arg, strerror(errno));
+}
+
const char **get_pathspec(const char *prefix, const char **pathspec)
{
const char *entry = *pathspec;
^ permalink raw reply related
* Re: [PATCH] git-fetch: resolve remote symrefs for HTTP transport
From: Shawn Pearce @ 2006-04-26 17:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Nick Hengeveld; +Cc: git
In-Reply-To: <20060426161001.GH32744@reactrix.com>
Nick Hengeveld <nickh@reactrix.com> wrote:
>
> Maybe this isn't the right way to handle this - since we're already
> calling perl we could use LWP to do the transfers (using keepalive
> even?)
LWP, no. My Mac OS X perl installation appears to have LWP installed
by dumb luck but my Gentoo Linux perl doesn't have LWP anywhere
in @INC. :-) Yet both systems run GIT happily.
The HTTP support in GIT is already linked against libcurl and libcurl
is required to use said HTTP support. I would think that libcurl
is capable of using Keep-Alive when possible, and libcurl and C
are certainly available anywhere GIT's HTTP support is currently
being used. Ideally any HTTP feature should either be using the
curl command line tool, or better, be written in C against the
libcurl library. But not LWP. Its not always available even though
a valid perl is.
--
Shawn.
^ permalink raw reply
* [PATCH] git-fetch: resolve remote symrefs for HTTP transport
From: Nick Hengeveld @ 2006-04-26 16:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: git
git-fetch validates that a remote ref resolves to a SHA1 prior to calling
git-http-fetch. This adds support for resolving a few levels of symrefs
to get to the SHA1.
Signed-off-by: Nick Hengeveld <nickh@reactrix.com>
---
Maybe this isn't the right way to handle this - since we're already
calling perl we could use LWP to do the transfers (using keepalive
even?) or we could let git-http-fetch take care of it and deal with
remote names that don't resolve. It may also make sense to modify
git-http-fetch so it can fetch more than one head at a time.
git-fetch.sh | 16 ++++++++++++----
1 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
aa50f9012834993d8bd080050bc13b23465f9185
diff --git a/git-fetch.sh b/git-fetch.sh
index 83143f8..280f62e 100755
--- a/git-fetch.sh
+++ b/git-fetch.sh
@@ -270,14 +270,22 @@ fetch_main () {
if [ -n "$GIT_SSL_NO_VERIFY" ]; then
curl_extra_args="-k"
fi
- remote_name_quoted=$(perl -e '
+ max_depth=5
+ depth=0
+ head="ref: $remote_name"
+ while (expr "z$head" : "zref:" && expr $depth \< $max_depth) >/dev/null
+ do
+ remote_name_quoted=$(perl -e '
my $u = $ARGV[0];
+ $u =~ s/^ref:\s*//;
$u =~ s{([^-a-zA-Z0-9/.])}{sprintf"%%%02x",ord($1)}eg;
print "$u";
- ' "$remote_name")
- head=$(curl -nsfL $curl_extra_args "$remote/$remote_name_quoted") &&
+ ' "$head")
+ head=$(curl -nsfL $curl_extra_args "$remote/$remote_name_quoted")
+ depth=$( expr \( $depth + 1 \) )
+ done
expr "z$head" : "z$_x40\$" >/dev/null ||
- die "Failed to fetch $remote_name from $remote"
+ die "Failed to fetch $remote_name from $remote"
echo >&2 Fetching "$remote_name from $remote" using http
git-http-fetch -v -a "$head" "$remote/" || exit
;;
--
1.3.0.g368f0-dirty
^ permalink raw reply related
* Re: [PATCH/RFC] reverse the pack-objects delta window logic
From: Nicolas Pitre @ 2006-04-26 15:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Junio C Hamano; +Cc: git
In-Reply-To: <7vpsj4sxer.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>
On Tue, 25 Apr 2006, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org> writes:
>
> > Note, this is a RFC particularly to Junio since the resulting pack is
> > larger than without the patch with git-repack -a -f. However using a
> > subsequent git-repack -a brings the pack size down to expected size. So
> > I'm not sure I've got everything right.
>
> I haven't tested it seriously yet, but there is nothing that
> looks obviously wrong that might cause the inflation problem,
> from the cursory look after applying the patch on top of your
> last round.
>
> > + if (nr_objects == nr_result && trg_entry->delta_limit >= max_depth)
> > + return 0;
>
> The older code was loosening this check only for a delta chain
> that is already in pack (which is limited to its previous
> max_depth). The end result is almost the same -- a thin pack
> recipient would have deeper delta than it asked. The difference
> is that the earlier code had implicit 2*max_depth limit,
Ah. Indeed. Didn't realize that. I can restore that behavior quite
easily if necessary.
> but this one makes the chain length unbounded, which I do not think it
> is necessarily a bad change.
Well as long as the thin pack doesn't carry too many revisions it should
be fine since, as the comment in the code sais, those packs are always
unpacked.
Initially I had a bug where the delta depth was completely ignored. I
was pretty excited when repacking the kernel produced a pack 20% smaller
although I didn't know why at that time. But when attempting another
git-repack -a -f then the initial object counting was sooooooo
slooooooooow.
> > - /*
> > - * NOTE!
> > - *
> > - * We always delta from the bigger to the smaller, since that's
> > - * more space-efficient (deletes don't have to say _what_ they
> > - * delete).
> > - */
>
> This comment by Linus still applies, even though the scan order
> is now reversed; no need to remove it.
This is not exactly true. In general it is so, but as we fixed the
deltification of objects with the same name but in different directories
it is well possible to go from smaller to larger and leaving that
comment there is misleading.
This is also why I changed the sizediff rule such that:
sizediff = src_size < size ? size - src_size : 0;
Since the src buffer already has its delta index computed, it costs
almost nothing to attempt matching much smaller objects against it.
However if we go from small to larger then the previous logic still
applies.
> > + if (trg_entry->delta) {
> > + /*
> > + * The target object already has a delta base but we just
> > + * found a better one. Remove it from its former base
> > + * childhood and redetermine the base delta_limit (if used).
> > + */
>
> And you are making the delta chain unbound for thin case, you
> can probably omit this with the same if() here; the
> recomputation seems rather expensive.
Ah right. I was doing so partly, but I can skip any tree maintenance
altogether in that case as well.
> > + if (!size)
> > + continue;
> > + delta_index = create_delta_index(n->data, size);
> > + if (!delta_index)
> > + die("out of memory");
>
> It might be worth saying "if (size < 50)" here as well; no point
> wasting the delta window for small sources.
Good point. No real effect on the pack size though.
> > -#if 0
> > - /* if we made n a delta, and if n is already at max
> > - * depth, leaving it in the window is pointless. we
> > - * should evict it first.
> > - * ... in theory only; somehow this makes things worse.
> > - */
> > - if (entry->delta && depth <= entry->depth)
> > - continue;
> > -#endif
>
> I was almost tempted to suggest that the degradation you are
> seeing might be related to this mystery I did not get around to
> solve. By allowing to give chance to try delta against less
> optimum candidates, it appeared that we ended up making the
> final pack size bigger than otherwise, which suggests that our
> choice between plain undeltified and a delta half its size might
> be favoring delta too much. But it does not appear to be
> related to the inflation you are seeing.
Certainly not, since git-repack -a may only delta _more_ and the pack
size actualy goes down a lot in my case.
The mystery I'm facing is why would a second pass with git-repack -a fix
things? It has a different window behavior since objects already
deltified do not occupy window space. Hmmm. That would certainly
explain why doing a git-repack -a after a git-repack -a -f produces a
smaller pack even currently.
> BTW, have you tried it without --no-reuse-pack on an object list
> that is not thin? It appears you are busting the depth limit.
>
> Using the same "git rev-list --objects v1.2.3..v1.3.0" as input,
> git-pack-objects without --no-reuse-pack gives this
> distribution:
>
> chain length = 1: 364 objects
> chain length = 2: 269 objects
> chain length = 3: 198 objects
> chain length = 4: 164 objects
> chain length = 5: 148 objects
> chain length = 6: 123 objects
> chain length = 7: 122 objects
> chain length = 8: 103 objects
> chain length = 9: 92 objects
> chain length = 10: 234 objects
> chain length = 11: 12 objects
> chain length = 12: 1 object
> chain length = 13: 2 objects
Oops. OK fixed.
> So it _might_ be that the depth limiting code is subtly broken
> which is causing you throw away a perfectly good delta base
> which in turn results in a bad pack.
Actually no. That bug instead allowed each given base to deltify more
targets than it should have.
Nicolas
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: lstat() call in rev-parse.c
From: Linus Torvalds @ 2006-04-26 15:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Matthias Lederhofer; +Cc: git
In-Reply-To: <E1FYlwn-0005mf-CL@moooo.ath.cx>
On Wed, 26 Apr 2006, Matthias Lederhofer wrote:
> > So the rule is: if you don't give that "--", then we have to be able
> > to confirm that the filenames are really files. Not a misspelled
> > revision name, or a revision name that was correctly spelled, but for
> > the wrong project, because you were in the wrong subdirectory ;)
>
> Shouldn't git rev-parse try to stat the file (additionally?) in the
> current directory instead of the top git directory? git (diff|log|..)
> seem to fail everytime in a subdirectory without --.
Good point. However, the reason for that is that it actually _does_ stat
the file in the current directory, but it has done the
revs->prefix = setup_git_directory();
in the init path (and it does need to do that, since that's what figures
out where the .git directory is, so that we can parse the revisions
correctly).
And that "setup_git_directory()" will chdir() to the root of the project.
So the "lstat()" should probably take "revs->prefix" into account, the
way get_pathspec() does. Ie we should probably use
char *name = argv[i];
if (rev->prefix)
name = prefix_filename(rev->prefix, strlen(rev->prefix), name);
if (lstat(name, ..) < 0)
die(...)
instead of just a plain lstat().
Probably worth doing as a small helper funtion of its own (and get rid of
the current "die_badfile()" - and do all of that inside the helper
function).
Somebody?
Linus
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: lstat() call in rev-parse.c
From: Matthias Lederhofer @ 2006-04-26 15:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: git
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0604230906370.3701@g5.osdl.org>
> So the rule is: if you don't give that "--", then we have to be able to
> confirm that the filenames are really files. Not a misspelled revision
> name, or a revision name that was correctly spelled, but for the wrong
> project, because you were in the wrong subdirectory ;)
Shouldn't git rev-parse try to stat the file (additionally?) in the
current directory instead of the top git directory? git (diff|log|..)
seem to fail everytime in a subdirectory without --.
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: new gitk feature
From: Linus Torvalds @ 2006-04-26 15:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Paul Mackerras; +Cc: git
In-Reply-To: <17487.21137.344427.173131@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com>
On Wed, 26 Apr 2006, Paul Mackerras wrote:
>
> I just pushed some changes to gitk which add a new feature, the
> ability to have multiple "views" of a repository. Each view is a
> subgraph of the full graph. At the moment the only subgraph that you
> can specify is the subgraph containing the commits that affect a
> specified set of files or directories. You can switch between views
> quickly, and if the currently selected commit exists in the new view
> when you switch views, it is selected in the new view.
This gets close to something I wanted, but at the same time falls very
short of it because the views are always shown completely disjoint.
I've wanted for a long time to have a way to _highlight_ commits. That's
actually very much a "view" thing, but it's a mode where you really see
one view, but the commits that exist in another view have a different
color (or have the commits that _don't_ exist in the other view be grayed
out).
I hope that your new "view" thing would support this notion too: instead
of having to totally switch between view, it would be wonderful if you
could have one "master view" and then use another view to "highlight".
Also, I think revision information should be part of a view. For example,
in the "highlight" case, I'd love to have the "main view" be the default
"everything", and then have some way to _highlight_ the view that is
defined by the revision pattern "v1.3.1.."
Any possibility of something light that? I'd _love_ to be able to see the
whole tree, but with things that touch certain files or things that are
newer highlighted.
(Btw, the "revision information" is also cool things like "--unpacked". I
actually use "gitk --unpacked" every once in a while, just because it's
such a cool way to say "show me everything I've added since I packed the
repo last).
Linus
^ permalink raw reply
* [PATCH] Add --continue and --abort options to git-rebase.
From: sean @ 2006-04-26 14:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: git
In-Reply-To: <e2np4p$b9a$1@sea.gmane.org>
git rebase [--onto <newbase>] <upstream> [<branch>]
git rebase --continue
git rebase --abort
Add "--continue" to restart the rebase process after
manually resolving conflicts. The user is warned if
there are still differences between the index and the
working files.
Add "--abort" to restore the original branch, and
remove the .dotest working files.
This fixes a minor bug in the current version where:
"git rebase master^ master" doesn't notice that there
is no need to perform the rebase.
Some minor additions to the git-rebase documentation.
---
Take 2. Must simpler patch which doesn't trying to
rejigger the command line too much.
Documentation/git-rebase.txt | 76 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
git-rebase.sh | 64 ++++++++++++++++++++++-------------
2 files changed, 102 insertions(+), 38 deletions(-)
b009f7b17dce8f860f242f9cafc2aa510daf9f41
diff --git a/Documentation/git-rebase.txt b/Documentation/git-rebase.txt
index 4a7e67a..cf74005 100644
--- a/Documentation/git-rebase.txt
+++ b/Documentation/git-rebase.txt
@@ -3,38 +3,54 @@ git-rebase(1)
NAME
----
-git-rebase - Rebase local commits to new upstream head
+git-rebase - Rebase local commits to a new head
SYNOPSIS
--------
'git-rebase' [--onto <newbase>] <upstream> [<branch>]
+'git-rebase' --continue
+
+'git-rebase' --abort
+
DESCRIPTION
-----------
-git-rebase applies to <upstream> (or optionally to <newbase>) commits
-from <branch> that do not appear in <upstream>. When <branch> is not
-specified it defaults to the current branch (HEAD).
+git-rebase replaces <branch> with a new branch of the same name. When
+the --onto option is provided the new branch starts out with a HEAD equal
+to <newbase>, otherwise it is equal to <upstream>. It then attempts to
+create a new commit for each commit from the original <branch> that does
+not exist in the <upstream> branch.
-When git-rebase is complete, <branch> will be updated to point to the
-newly created line of commit objects, so the previous line will not be
-accessible unless there are other references to it already.
+It is possible that a merge failure will prevent this process from being
+completely automatic. You will have to resolve any such merge failure
+and run `git rebase --continue`. If you can not resolve the merge
+failure, running `git rebase --abort` will restore the original <branch>
+and remove the working files found in the .dotest directory.
+
+Note that if <branch> is not specified on the command line, the currently
+checked out branch is used.
Assume the following history exists and the current branch is "topic":
+------------
A---B---C topic
/
D---E---F---G master
+------------
From this point, the result of either of the following commands:
+
git-rebase master
git-rebase master topic
would be:
+------------
A'--B'--C' topic
/
D---E---F---G master
+------------
While, starting from the same point, the result of either of the following
commands:
@@ -44,21 +60,33 @@ commands:
would be:
+------------
A'--B'--C' topic
/
D---E---F---G master
+------------
In case of conflict, git-rebase will stop at the first problematic commit
-and leave conflict markers in the tree. After resolving the conflict manually
-and updating the index with the desired resolution, you can continue the
-rebasing process with
+and leave conflict markers in the tree. You can use git diff to locate
+the markers (<<<<<<) and make edits to resolve the conflict. For each
+file you edit, you need to tell git that the conflict has been resolved,
+typically this would be done with
+
+
+ git update-index <filename>
+
+
+After resolving the conflict manually and updating the index with the
+desired resolution, you can continue the rebasing process with
+
+
+ git rebase --continue
- git am --resolved --3way
Alternatively, you can undo the git-rebase with
- git reset --hard ORIG_HEAD
- rm -r .dotest
+
+ git rebase --abort
OPTIONS
-------
@@ -73,6 +101,28 @@ OPTIONS
<branch>::
Working branch; defaults to HEAD.
+--continue::
+ Restart the rebasing process after having resolved a merge conflict.
+
+--abort::
+ Restore the original branch and abort the rebase operation.
+
+NOTES
+-----
+When you rebase a branch, you are changing its history in a way that
+will cause problems for anyone who already has a copy of the branch
+in their repository and tries to pull updates from you. You should
+understand the implications of using 'git rebase' on a repository that
+you share.
+
+When the git rebase command is run, it will first execute a "pre-rebase"
+hook if one exists. You can use this hook to do sanity checks and
+reject the rebase if it isn't appropriate. Please see the template
+pre-rebase hook script for an example.
+
+You must be in the top directory of your project to start (or continue)
+a rebase. Upon completion, <branch> will be the current branch.
+
Author
------
Written by Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
diff --git a/git-rebase.sh b/git-rebase.sh
index 86dfe9c..2085ebe 100755
--- a/git-rebase.sh
+++ b/git-rebase.sh
@@ -4,37 +4,51 @@ # Copyright (c) 2005 Junio C Hamano.
#
USAGE='[--onto <newbase>] <upstream> [<branch>]'
-LONG_USAGE='git-rebase applies to <upstream> (or optionally to <newbase>) commits
-from <branch> that do not appear in <upstream>. When <branch> is not
-specified it defaults to the current branch (HEAD).
-
-When git-rebase is complete, <branch> will be updated to point to the
-newly created line of commit objects, so the previous line will not be
-accessible unless there are other references to it already.
-
-Assuming the following history:
-
- A---B---C topic
- /
- D---E---F---G master
-
-The result of the following command:
-
- git-rebase --onto master~1 master topic
-
- would be:
-
- A'\''--B'\''--C'\'' topic
- /
- D---E---F---G master
+LONG_USAGE='git-rebase replaces <branch> with a new branch of the
+same name. When the --onto option is provided the new branch starts
+out with a HEAD equal to <newbase>, otherwise it is equal to <upstream>
+It then attempts to create a new commit for each commit from the original
+<branch> that does not exist in the <upstream> branch.
+
+It is possible that a merge failure will prevent this process from being
+completely automatic. You will have to resolve any such merge failure
+and run git-rebase --continue. If you can not resolve the merge failure,
+running git-rebase --abort will restore the original <branch> and remove
+the working files found in the .dotest directory.
+
+Note that if <branch> is not specified on the command line, the
+currently checked out branch is used. You must be in the top
+directory of your project to start (or continue) a rebase.
+
+Example: git-rebase master~1 topic
+
+ A---B---C topic A'\''--B'\''--C'\'' topic
+ / --> /
+ D---E---F---G master D---E---F---G master
'
-
. git-sh-setup
unset newbase
while case "$#" in 0) break ;; esac
do
case "$1" in
+ --continue)
+ diff=$(git-diff-files)
+ case "$diff" in
+ ?*) echo "You must edit all merge conflicts and then"
+ echo "mark them as resolved using git update-index"
+ exit 1
+ ;;
+ esac
+ git am --resolved --3way
+ exit
+ ;;
+ --abort)
+ [ -d .dotest ] || die "No rebase in progress?"
+ git reset --hard ORIG_HEAD
+ rm -r .dotest
+ exit
+ ;;
--onto)
test 2 -le "$#" || usage
newbase="$2"
@@ -107,7 +121,7 @@ # Now we are rebasing commits $upstream.
# Check if we are already based on $onto, but this should be
# done only when upstream and onto are the same.
-if test "$upstream" = "onto"
+if test "$upstream" = "$onto"
then
mb=$(git-merge-base "$onto" "$branch")
if test "$mb" = "$onto"
--
1.3.0.gb009
^ permalink raw reply related
* Re: new gitk feature
From: Jan-Benedict Glaw @ 2006-04-26 13:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Paul Mackerras; +Cc: git
In-Reply-To: <17487.21137.344427.173131@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 795 bytes --]
On Wed, 2006-04-26 20:59:29 +1000, Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org> wrote:
> Thus, for the kernel repository I can have a "PPC" view which shows
> changes to arch/powerpc, include/asm-powerpc etc. When looking at a
> commit in that view, I can switch to the "All files" view to see where
> that commit fits in the overall history.
Hmm.. Neat feature for arch maintainers. An easy way to see what's
happening in the i386 tree for example :)
MfG, JBG
--
Jan-Benedict Glaw jbglaw@lug-owl.de . +49-172-7608481 _ O _
"Eine Freie Meinung in einem Freien Kopf | Gegen Zensur | Gegen Krieg _ _ O
für einen Freien Staat voll Freier Bürger" | im Internet! | im Irak! O O O
ret = do_actions((curr | FREE_SPEECH) & ~(NEW_COPYRIGHT_LAW | DRM | TCPA));
[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: [PATCH] Alter git-rebase command line options.
From: sean @ 2006-04-26 13:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jakub Narebski; +Cc: git
In-Reply-To: <e2np4p$b9a$1@sea.gmane.org>
On Wed, 26 Apr 2006 14:30:47 +0200
Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> What about 'git-rebase --onto <newbase> <upstream> <branch>' three options
> version?
Ahh yes, I didn't look closely enough at that, and got fooled by a bug
in the current version[1] into thinking it was never used anyway. Will have
to respin, the script and come up with some docs. What's a reason someone
would want or need to use this three option version ?
Sean
[1] Line 110: if test "$upstream" = "onto"
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: [RFC] [PATCH 0/5] Implement 'prior' commit object links (and other commit links ideas)
From: Jakub Narebski @ 2006-04-26 12:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: git
In-Reply-To: <7vslo1v4zw.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>
Junio C Hamano wrote:
> My initial 'related' without 'note' was flawed - it used
> cherry-pick as an example of 'related' when it clearly should
> have been 'note' (no connectivitiy required).
[...]
> There definitely needs to be an ability to specify a list of
> "nature of links this repository accepts", if we were to do
> 'link'. It probably should default to an empty set. rev-list
> --objects would include objects pointed by 'link' only when the
> repository wants such links to be honored. fsck-objects will
> declare an object that is reachable only by a 'link' that is not
> accepted by the repository "uninteresting" and let git-prune
> remove it.
I think that perhaps connectivity should be more fine-grained than this.
Namely we might want links which are not fsck-able nor pulled (and can be
dangling), but will prevent object pointed from being pruned. The
"original" (or "cherrypick") relation comes to mind.
Of course that can be configured per repository...
--
Jakub Narebski
Warsaw, Poland
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: [PATCH] Alter git-rebase command line options.
From: Jakub Narebski @ 2006-04-26 12:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: git
In-Reply-To: <BAYC1-PASMTP0659C709B7FFCB63182FE1AEBC0@CEZ.ICE>
sean wrote:
> git rebase [--branch <branch>] <newbase>
> git rebase --continue
> git rebase --abort
>
> Add "--continue" to restart the rebase process after
> manually resolving conflicts. The user is warned if
> there are still differences between the index and the
> working files.
>
> Add "--abort" to restore the original branch, and
> remove the .dotest working files.
Very nice.
> SYNOPSIS
> --------
> -'git-rebase' [--onto <newbase>] <upstream> [<branch>]
> +'git-rebase' [--branch <branch>] <newbase>
> +
> +'git-rebase' --continue
> +
> +'git-rebase' --abort
>
> DESCRIPTION
> -----------
> -git-rebase applies to <upstream> (or optionally to <newbase>) commits
> -from <branch> that do not appear in <upstream>. When <branch> is not
> -specified it defaults to the current branch (HEAD).
> +git-rebase replaces <branch> with a new branch of the same name having
> +a HEAD of <newbase>. It then attempts to make a new commit for each
> +commit from the original <branch> that does not yet exist in this new
> +<branch>.
What about 'git-rebase --onto <newbase> <upstream> <branch>' three options
version?
--
Jakub Narebski
Warsaw, Poland
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: [RFC] [PATCH 0/5] Implement 'prior' commit object links (and other commit links ideas)
From: Jakub Narebski @ 2006-04-26 12:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: git
In-Reply-To: <444F58B0.6090603@op5.se>
Andreas Ericsson wrote:
> I've suggested before that arbitrary headers could be added to git
> commits by prefixing them with X- (preferrably followed by an abbrev of
> the porcelain name adding the note). This way it's easy to filter, you
> get the free ride, and porcelains can do whatever they want while core
> git can strip everything following the sequence "\nX-" up to and
> including the next newline.
>
> This way you have only one special byte-sequence with special meaning
> that the plumbing has to know it should ignore, which is a lot more
> extensible (not to mention easier to code).
>
> In addition, if those X- lines aren't included in the sha1 computation
> they can easily be removed and added to without affecting the ancestry
> chain. This would probably have quite a performance impact though.
>
> That said, I don't think even "X-" headers is a very good idea. Perhaps
> i've just got poor imagination but I can't think of a good use for them.
Well, the "note" headers are just that, but instead of prefixing 'extra'
headers with "X-" you prefix them with "note ".
I think that the "note" (or X-) headers should be included in calculating
sha1, as the free-form of commit (the comment) is.
As to use: for now 'git cherry-pick' and 'git revert' records the commit
picked or commit reverted in free form. It could be recorded in "note"
header, or additionally as "note" header. 'git rebase' could also record
the original commit e.g. as "note original <branchname> <sha1-of-commit>".
And it would be the place for Porcelain to record simple information which
is of use to them, but usualy not interesting to user, so it would be
better if it wouldn't pollute free-form/comment area.
The "prior" (for saving "pu"-like branches previous state) and "bind" (for
managing subprojects) I think should be rather of "related"/"link" kind.
--
Jakub Narebski
Warsaw, Poland
^ permalink raw reply
* [PATCH] Alter git-rebase command line options.
From: sean @ 2006-04-26 11:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: git
git rebase [--branch <branch>] <newbase>
git rebase --continue
git rebase --abort
Add "--continue" to restart the rebase process after
manually resolving conflicts. The user is warned if
there are still differences between the index and the
working files.
Add "--abort" to restore the original branch, and
remove the .dotest working files.
Change the order that branch and newbase are specified
as per comments from Linus. Also remove the need to
specify both an upstream branch _and_ a new merge base.
The documentation is updated to reflect this new command
line format but the script still quietly supports the
existing command line options completely.
This fixes a minor bug in the current version where:
"git rebase master^ master" doesn't notice that there
is no need to perform the rebase.
---
Documentation/git-rebase.txt | 95 ++++++++++++++++++++++--------
git-rebase.sh | 133 ++++++++++++++++++++++--------------------
2 files changed, 139 insertions(+), 89 deletions(-)
d8366d9de1aecf3143af646f49e7f7bc0f924ae6
diff --git a/Documentation/git-rebase.txt b/Documentation/git-rebase.txt
index 4a7e67a..f1e83ea 100644
--- a/Documentation/git-rebase.txt
+++ b/Documentation/git-rebase.txt
@@ -3,76 +3,121 @@ git-rebase(1)
NAME
----
-git-rebase - Rebase local commits to new upstream head
+git-rebase - Rebase local commits to a new upstream head
SYNOPSIS
--------
-'git-rebase' [--onto <newbase>] <upstream> [<branch>]
+'git-rebase' [--branch <branch>] <newbase>
+
+'git-rebase' --continue
+
+'git-rebase' --abort
DESCRIPTION
-----------
-git-rebase applies to <upstream> (or optionally to <newbase>) commits
-from <branch> that do not appear in <upstream>. When <branch> is not
-specified it defaults to the current branch (HEAD).
+git-rebase replaces <branch> with a new branch of the same name having
+a HEAD of <newbase>. It then attempts to make a new commit for each
+commit from the original <branch> that does not yet exist in this new
+<branch>.
+
+It is possible that a merge failure will prevent this process from being
+completely automatic. You will have to resolve any such merge failure
+and run `git rebase --continue`. If you can not resolve the merge
+failure, running `git rebase --abort` will restore the original <branch>
+and remove the working files found in the .dotest directory.
-When git-rebase is complete, <branch> will be updated to point to the
-newly created line of commit objects, so the previous line will not be
-accessible unless there are other references to it already.
+Note that if <branch> is not specified on the command line, the currently
+checked out branch is used.
Assume the following history exists and the current branch is "topic":
+------------
A---B---C topic
/
D---E---F---G master
+------------
+
+From this point, the result of running the following command:
+
-From this point, the result of either of the following commands:
+ git rebase --branch topic master
- git-rebase master
- git-rebase master topic
would be:
+------------
A'--B'--C' topic
/
D---E---F---G master
+------------
While, starting from the same point, the result of either of the following
commands:
- git-rebase --onto master~1 master
- git-rebase --onto master~1 master topic
+ git rebase master~1
+ git rebase --branch topic master~1
+
would be:
+------------
A'--B'--C' topic
/
D---E---F---G master
+------------
In case of conflict, git-rebase will stop at the first problematic commit
-and leave conflict markers in the tree. After resolving the conflict manually
-and updating the index with the desired resolution, you can continue the
-rebasing process with
+and leave conflict markers in the tree. You can use git diff to locate
+the markers (<<<<<<) and make edits to resolve the conflict. For each
+file you edit, you need to tell git that the conflict has been resolved,
+typically this would be done with
+
+
+ git update-index <filename>
+
+
+After resolving the conflict manually and updating the index with the
+desired resolution, you can continue the rebasing process with
+
+
+ git rebase --continue
- git am --resolved --3way
Alternatively, you can undo the git-rebase with
- git reset --hard ORIG_HEAD
- rm -r .dotest
+
+ git rebase --abort
OPTIONS
-------
<newbase>::
- Starting point at which to create the new commits. If the
- --onto option is not specified, the starting point is
- <upstream>.
-
-<upstream>::
- Upstream branch to compare against.
+ Starting point at which to create the new commits.
<branch>::
Working branch; defaults to HEAD.
+--continue::
+ Restart the rebasing process after having resolved a merge conflict.
+
+--abort::
+ Restore the original branch and abort the rebase operation.
+
+NOTES
+-----
+When you rebase a branch, you are changing its history in a way that
+will cause problems for anyone who already has a copy of the branch
+in their repository and tries to pull updates from you. You should
+understand the implications of using 'git rebase' on a repository that
+you share.
+
+When the git rebase command is run, it will first execute a "pre-rebase"
+hook if one exists. You can use this hook to do sanity checks and
+reject the rebase if it isn't appropriate. Please see the template
+pre-rebase hook script for an example.
+
+You must be in the top directory of your project to start (or continue)
+a rebase. Upon completion, <branch> will be the current branch.
+
Author
------
Written by Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
diff --git a/git-rebase.sh b/git-rebase.sh
index 86dfe9c..5a4e33b 100755
--- a/git-rebase.sh
+++ b/git-rebase.sh
@@ -3,40 +3,61 @@ #
# Copyright (c) 2005 Junio C Hamano.
#
-USAGE='[--onto <newbase>] <upstream> [<branch>]'
-LONG_USAGE='git-rebase applies to <upstream> (or optionally to <newbase>) commits
-from <branch> that do not appear in <upstream>. When <branch> is not
-specified it defaults to the current branch (HEAD).
-
-When git-rebase is complete, <branch> will be updated to point to the
-newly created line of commit objects, so the previous line will not be
-accessible unless there are other references to it already.
-
-Assuming the following history:
-
- A---B---C topic
- /
- D---E---F---G master
-
-The result of the following command:
-
- git-rebase --onto master~1 master topic
-
- would be:
-
- A'\''--B'\''--C'\'' topic
- /
- D---E---F---G master
+USAGE='[--branch <branch>] <newbase>'
+LONG_USAGE='git-rebase replaces <branch> with a new one of the
+same name having a HEAD of <newbase>. It then attempts to create
+a new commit for each commit from the original <branch> that does
+not yet exist on this new <branch>.
+
+It is possible that a merge failure will prevent this process
+from being completely automatic. You will have to resolve any
+such merge failure and run git-rebase --continue. If you can
+not resolve the merge failure, running git-rebase --abort will
+restore the original <branch> and remove the working files found
+in the .dotest directory.
+
+Note that if <branch> is not specified on the command line, the
+currently checked out branch is used. You must be in the top
+directory of your project to start (or continue) a rebase.
+
+Example: git-rebase --branch topic master~1
+
+ A---B---C topic A'\''--B'\''--C'\'' topic
+ / --> /
+ D---E---F---G master D---E---F---G master
'
. git-sh-setup
unset newbase
+unset branch_name
while case "$#" in 0) break ;; esac
do
case "$1" in
+ --continue)
+ diff=$(git-diff-files)
+ case "$diff" in
+ ?*) echo "You must edit all merge conflicts and then"
+ echo "mark them as resolved using git update-index"
+ exit 1
+ ;;
+ esac
+ git am --resolved --3way
+ exit
+ ;;
+ --abort)
+ [ -d .dotest ] || die "No rebase in progress?"
+ git reset --hard ORIG_HEAD
+ rm -r .dotest
+ exit
+ ;;
+ --branch)
+ test $# -ne 3 -o -n "$newbase" && usage
+ branch_name="$2"
+ shift
+ ;;
--onto)
- test 2 -le "$#" || usage
+ test $# -lt 2 -o -n "$branch_name" && usage
newbase="$2"
shift
;;
@@ -49,6 +70,20 @@ do
esac
shift
done
+# Quietly support the historic command line [--onto newbase] newbase' [branch]
+test $# -lt 1 && usage
+test -z "$newbase" && newbase="$1"
+shift
+if [ -z "$branch_name" ]; then
+ if [ $# -gt 0 ]; then
+ branch_name="$1"
+ shift
+ else branch_name=`git symbolic-ref HEAD` || die "No current branch"
+ branch_name=`expr "z$branch_name" : 'zrefs/heads/\(.*\)'`
+ fi
+fi
+test $# -gt 0 && usage
+git checkout "$branch_name" || usage
# Make sure we do not have .dotest
if mkdir .dotest
@@ -72,11 +107,6 @@ case "$diff" in
;;
esac
-# The upstream head must be given. Make sure it is valid.
-upstream_name="$1"
-upstream=`git rev-parse --verify "${upstream_name}^0"` ||
- die "invalid upstream $upstream_name"
-
# If a hook exists, give it a chance to interrupt
if test -x "$GIT_DIR/hooks/pre-rebase"
then
@@ -86,47 +116,22 @@ then
}
fi
-# If the branch to rebase is given, first switch to it.
-case "$#" in
-2)
- branch_name="$2"
- git-checkout "$2" || usage
- ;;
-*)
- branch_name=`git symbolic-ref HEAD` || die "No current branch"
- branch_name=`expr "z$branch_name" : 'zrefs/heads/\(.*\)'`
- ;;
-esac
-branch=$(git-rev-parse --verify "${branch_name}^0") || exit
-
# Make sure the branch to rebase onto is valid.
-onto_name=${newbase-"$upstream_name"}
-onto=$(git-rev-parse --verify "${onto_name}^0") || exit
-
-# Now we are rebasing commits $upstream..$branch on top of $onto
+branch=$(git-rev-parse --verify "${branch_name}^0") || exit
+onto=$(git-rev-parse --verify "${newbase}^0") || exit
# Check if we are already based on $onto, but this should be
# done only when upstream and onto are the same.
-if test "$upstream" = "onto"
-then
- mb=$(git-merge-base "$onto" "$branch")
- if test "$mb" = "$onto"
- then
- echo >&2 "Current branch $branch_name is up to date."
- exit 0
- fi
-fi
-
-# Rewind the head to "$onto"; this saves our current head in ORIG_HEAD.
-git-reset --hard "$onto"
-
-# If the $onto is a proper descendant of the tip of the branch, then
-# we just fast forwarded.
+mb=$(git-merge-base "$onto" "$branch")
if test "$mb" = "$onto"
then
- echo >&2 "Fast-forwarded $branch to $newbase."
+ echo >&2 "Current branch $branch_name already has $newbase as a base!"
exit 0
fi
-git-format-patch -k --stdout --full-index "$upstream" ORIG_HEAD |
+# Rewind the head to "$onto"; this saves our current head in ORIG_HEAD.
+git-reset --hard "$newbase"
+
+# Now we are rebasing commits $newbase..$branch on top of $newbase
+git-format-patch -k --stdout --full-index "$newbase" ORIG_HEAD |
git am --binary -3 -k
--
1.3.0.gd8366
^ permalink raw reply related
page: next (older) | prev (newer) | latest
- recent:[subjects (threaded)|topics (new)|topics (active)]
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox