* Re: $PATH pollution and t9902-completion.sh
From: Torsten Bögershausen @ 2012-12-20 20:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jeff King
Cc: Junio C Hamano, Adam Spiers, git mailing list,
Torsten Bögershausen
In-Reply-To: <20121220200109.GC21785@sigill.intra.peff.net>
On 20.12.12 21:01, Jeff King wrote:
> +test_fully_contains () {
>> + sort "$1" >expect.sorted &&
>> + sort "$2" >actual.sorted &&
>> + test $(comm -23 expect.sorted actual.sorted | wc -l) = 0
>> +}
(Good to learn about the comm command, thanks )
What do we think about this:
diff --git a/t/t9902-completion.sh b/t/t9902-completion.sh
index 3cd53f8..82eeba7 100755
--- a/t/t9902-completion.sh
+++ b/t/t9902-completion.sh
@@ -62,12 +62,16 @@ test_completion ()
{
if test $# -gt 1
then
- printf '%s\n' "$2" >expected
+ printf '%s\n' "$2" | sort >expected.sorted
else
- sed -e 's/Z$//' >expected
+ sed -e 's/Z$//' | sort >expected.sorted
fi &&
run_completion "$1" &&
- test_cmp expected out
+ sort <out >actual.sorted &&
+ >empty &&
+ comm -23 expected.sorted actual.sorted >actual &&
+ test_cmp empty actual &&
+ rm empty actual
}
# Test __gitcomp.
^ permalink raw reply related
* Re: What's cooking in git.git (Dec 2012, #05; Tue, 18)
From: Junio C Hamano @ 2012-12-20 20:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jeff King; +Cc: git
In-Reply-To: <20121220195837.GB21785@sigill.intra.peff.net>
Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:
> So our attempt for more compile-time safety may actually introduce a
> run-time bug. And it is a hard bug to find, as the preprocessor
> "magically" converts the error code into -1 without you being able to
> see it in the code.
>
> It would be safer to just unconditionally use the macros and drop the
> return values from the functions entirely, like the patch below
> (squashed on top of what is in jk/error-const-return). But it cannot
> work for error(), because the variadic nature means we need to restrict
> ourselves to __GNUC__.
While I like the general direction, I am not sure if we are OK with
the introduction of
> #undef config_error_nonbool
> -int config_error_nonbool(const char *var)
> +void config_error_nonbool(const char *var)
> {
> - return error("Missing value for '%s'", var);
> + error("Missing value for '%s'", var);
> }
a new, arguably false, "returned value not used" warning from this
point. Perhaps it is fine for now, as we have tons of calls that do
not cast the return value to "(void)".
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: [PATCH] oneway_merge(): only lstat() when told to update worktree
From: Junio C Hamano @ 2012-12-20 20:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Martin von Zweigbergk; +Cc: git
In-Reply-To: <1356025067-5396-1-git-send-email-martinvonz@gmail.com>
Martin von Zweigbergk <martinvonz@gmail.com> writes:
> Although the subject line of 613f027 (read-tree -u one-way merge fix
> to check out locally modified paths., 2006-05-15) mentions "read-tree
> -u", it did not seem to check whether -u was in effect. Not checking
> whether -u is in effect makes e.g. "read-tree --reset" lstat() the
> worktree, even though the worktree stat should not matter for that
> operation.
>
> This speeds up e.g. "git reset" a little on the linux-2.6 repo (best
> of five, warm cache):
>
> Before After
> real 0m0.288s 0m0.233s
> user 0m0.190s 0m0.150s
> sys 0m0.090s 0m0.080s
> ---
Sign-off?
I briefly discussed this with Martin in person and came to the same
conclusion. To me this looks like an obvious performance fix, but an
independent code audit catches our mistakes is of course welcomed.
Thanks.
> I am very unfamiliar with this part of git, so my attempt at a
> motivation may be totally off.
>
> I have another twenty-or-so patches to reset.c coming up that take the
> timings down to around 90 ms, but this patch was quite unrelated to
> that. Those other patches actually make this patch pointless for "git
> reset" (it takes another path), but I hope this is still a good change
> for other operations that use oneway_merge.
>
> unpack-trees.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/unpack-trees.c b/unpack-trees.c
> index 6d96366..61acc5e 100644
> --- a/unpack-trees.c
> +++ b/unpack-trees.c
> @@ -1834,7 +1834,7 @@ int oneway_merge(struct cache_entry **src, struct unpack_trees_options *o)
>
> if (old && same(old, a)) {
> int update = 0;
> - if (o->reset && !ce_uptodate(old) && !ce_skip_worktree(old)) {
> + if (o->reset && o->update && !ce_uptodate(old) && !ce_skip_worktree(old)) {
> struct stat st;
> if (lstat(old->name, &st) ||
> ie_match_stat(o->src_index, old, &st, CE_MATCH_IGNORE_VALID|CE_MATCH_IGNORE_SKIP_WORKTREE))
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: $PATH pollution and t9902-completion.sh
From: Jeff King @ 2012-12-20 20:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Junio C Hamano; +Cc: Adam Spiers, git mailing list
In-Reply-To: <7vobho4hxa.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 11:55:45AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> The beginning of such a change may look like the attached patch.
> [...]
> +test_fully_contains () {
> + sort "$1" >expect.sorted &&
> + sort "$2" >actual.sorted &&
> + test $(comm -23 expect.sorted actual.sorted | wc -l) = 0
> +}
I like the direction. I suspect test_fully_contains could be used in a
lot of other places, too.
-Peff
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: What's cooking in git.git (Dec 2012, #05; Tue, 18)
From: Jeff King @ 2012-12-20 19:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Junio C Hamano; +Cc: git
In-Reply-To: <7vwqwc617y.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 10:13:37AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> >> * jk/error-const-return (2012-12-15) 2 commits
> >> - silence some -Wuninitialized false positives
> >> - make error()'s constant return value more visible
> >>
> >> Help compilers' flow analysis by making it more explicit that
> >> error() always returns -1, to reduce false "variable used
> >> uninitialized" warnings.
> >>
> >> This is still an RFC.
> >
> > What's your opinion on this?
>
> Ugly but not too much so, and it would be useful.
>
> The only thing that makes it ugly is that it promises error() will
> return -1 and nothing else forever, but at this point in the
> evolution of the codebase, I think we are pretty much committed to
> it anyway, so I do not think it is a problem.
Right. I do not mind saying "error() will always return -1" and forcing
somebody who changes that assumption to update the macro. But what
worries me is that when they make that update, there is no compile-time
check that indicates the macro and the function are no longer in sync.
So our attempt for more compile-time safety may actually introduce a
run-time bug. And it is a hard bug to find, as the preprocessor
"magically" converts the error code into -1 without you being able to
see it in the code.
It would be safer to just unconditionally use the macros and drop the
return values from the functions entirely, like the patch below
(squashed on top of what is in jk/error-const-return). But it cannot
work for error(), because the variadic nature means we need to restrict
ourselves to __GNUC__.
diff --git a/cache.h b/cache.h
index 0e8e5d8..694b146 100644
--- a/cache.h
+++ b/cache.h
@@ -1135,10 +1135,8 @@ extern int config_error_nonbool(const char *);
extern int check_repository_format_version(const char *var, const char *value, void *cb);
extern int git_env_bool(const char *, int);
extern int git_config_system(void);
-extern int config_error_nonbool(const char *);
-#ifdef __GNUC__
+extern void config_error_nonbool(const char *);
#define config_error_nonbool(s) (config_error_nonbool(s), -1)
-#endif
extern const char *get_log_output_encoding(void);
extern const char *get_commit_output_encoding(void);
diff --git a/config.c b/config.c
index 526f682..a22e78c 100644
--- a/config.c
+++ b/config.c
@@ -1661,7 +1661,7 @@ int config_error_nonbool(const char *var)
* get a boolean value (i.e. "[my] var" means "true").
*/
#undef config_error_nonbool
-int config_error_nonbool(const char *var)
+void config_error_nonbool(const char *var)
{
- return error("Missing value for '%s'", var);
+ error("Missing value for '%s'", var);
}
diff --git a/parse-options.c b/parse-options.c
index 67e98a6..ba39dd9 100644
--- a/parse-options.c
+++ b/parse-options.c
@@ -586,11 +586,12 @@ int opterror(const struct option *opt, const char *reason, int flags)
}
#undef opterror
-int opterror(const struct option *opt, const char *reason, int flags)
+void opterror(const struct option *opt, const char *reason, int flags)
{
if (flags & OPT_SHORT)
- return error("switch `%c' %s", opt->short_name, reason);
+ error("switch `%c' %s", opt->short_name, reason);
if (flags & OPT_UNSET)
- return error("option `no-%s' %s", opt->long_name, reason);
- return error("option `%s' %s", opt->long_name, reason);
+ error("option `no-%s' %s", opt->long_name, reason);
+ else
+ error("option `%s' %s", opt->long_name, reason);
}
diff --git a/parse-options.h b/parse-options.h
index e703853..bd43314 100644
--- a/parse-options.h
+++ b/parse-options.h
@@ -176,10 +176,8 @@ extern int opterror(const struct option *opt, const char *reason, int flags);
const struct option *options);
extern int optbug(const struct option *opt, const char *reason);
-extern int opterror(const struct option *opt, const char *reason, int flags);
-#ifdef __GNUC__
+extern void opterror(const struct option *opt, const char *reason, int flags);
#define opterror(o,r,f) (opterror((o),(r),(f)), -1)
-#endif
/*----- incremental advanced APIs -----*/
^ permalink raw reply related
* Re: $PATH pollution and t9902-completion.sh
From: Junio C Hamano @ 2012-12-20 19:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jeff King; +Cc: Adam Spiers, git mailing list
In-Reply-To: <7vk3sc606f.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes:
> Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:
>
>> 2. Loosen the test to look for the presence of "checkout", but not
>> fail when other items are present. Bonus points if it makes sure
>> that everything returned starts with "check".
>>
>> I think (2) is the ideal solution in terms of behavior, but writing it
>> may be more of a pain.
>
> Yeah, I think (2) is the way to go.
The beginning of such a change may look like the attached patch.
If we want to go for the bonus points, we would either add another
parameter "prefix" to the test_completion function, or introduce the
test_complete_command function that takes that prefix parameter, and
in addition to making sure lines from "expect" is fully contained in
the "actual", make sure that output from
comm -13 expect.sorted actual.sorted
all begin with that "prefix" string, perhaps with
grep -v "^$prefix"
or something. The test_fully_contains function needs to be renamed
if somebody goes that additional step.
diff --git a/t/t9902-completion.sh b/t/t9902-completion.sh
index 3cd53f8..5fab389 100755
--- a/t/t9902-completion.sh
+++ b/t/t9902-completion.sh
@@ -54,10 +54,16 @@ run_completion ()
__git_wrap__git_main && print_comp
}
+test_fully_contains () {
+ sort "$1" >expect.sorted &&
+ sort "$2" >actual.sorted &&
+ test $(comm -23 expect.sorted actual.sorted | wc -l) = 0
+}
+
# Test high-level completion
# Arguments are:
# 1: typed text so far (cur)
-# 2: expected completion
+# 2: expected completion (if missing, this is read from stdin)
test_completion ()
{
if test $# -gt 1
@@ -67,7 +73,7 @@ test_completion ()
sed -e 's/Z$//' >expected
fi &&
run_completion "$1" &&
- test_cmp expected out
+ test_fully_contains expected out
}
# Test __gitcomp.
^ permalink raw reply related
* Re: [PATCH v6 0/7] make test output coloring more intuitive
From: Jeff King @ 2012-12-20 19:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Junio C Hamano; +Cc: Adam Spiers, git list
In-Reply-To: <7vy5gs4jiy.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 11:21:09AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> The "expected_failure" cases painted in "warn" are all long-known
> failures; I do not think reminding about them in "bold" over and
> over will help encouraging the developers take a look at them.
>
> The "skipped" cases fall into two categories. Either you already
> know you choose to not to care (e.g. I do not expect to use git-p4
> and decided not to install p4 anywhere, so I may have t98?? on
> GIT_SKIP_TESTS environment) or you haven't reached that point on a
> new system and haven't realized that you didn't install a package
> needed to run tests you care about (e.g. cvsserver tests would not
> run without Perl interface to SQLite). For the former, the bold
> output is merely distracting; for the latter, bold _might_ help in
> this case.
>
> At least, I think
>
> GIT_SKIP_TESTS=t98?? sh t9800-git-p4-basic.sh -v
>
> should paint "skipping test t9800 altogether" (emitted with "-v) and
> the last line "1..0 # SKIP skip all tests in t9800" both in the same
> "info" color.
>
> How about going further to reduce "bold" a bit more, like this?
Yeah, I think it is a little easier on the eyes while maintaining the
intended color scheme.
> diff --git a/t/test-lib.sh b/t/test-lib.sh
> index aaf013e..2bbb81d 100644
> --- a/t/test-lib.sh
> +++ b/t/test-lib.sh
> @@ -182,13 +182,13 @@ then
> error)
> tput bold; tput setaf 1;; # bold red
> skip)
> - tput bold; tput setaf 4;; # bold blue
> + tput setaf 4;; # bold blue
On my xterm, at least, this is actually the difference between light
blue" and dark blue, not bold and not-bold. I think it is OK, though to
be honest, having seen the "skip all" messages in cyan (e.g., running
t9800), I think just printing skip messages in cyan looks best. But it
is not that big a deal to me, and we are well into bikeshed territory, I
think, so that will be my last word on the subject.
-Peff
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: [PATCH v6 0/7] make test output coloring more intuitive
From: Junio C Hamano @ 2012-12-20 19:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jeff King; +Cc: Adam Spiers, git list
In-Reply-To: <20121220161110.GA10605@sigill.intra.peff.net>
Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:
>> Good point, I forgot to check what it looked like with -v. Since this
>> series is already on v6, is there a more lightweight way of addressing
>> this tiny tweak than sending v7?
>
> It is ultimately up to Junio, but I suspect he would be OK if you just
> reposted patch 4/7 with the above squashed. Or even just said "I like
> this, please squash it into patch 4 (change info messages from
> yellow/brown to bold cyan).
Surely; as long as the series is not in 'next', the change to be
squashed is not too big and it is not too much work (and in this
case it certainly is not).
I actually wonder if "skipped test in bold blue" and "known breakage
in bold yellow" should also lose the boldness. Errors and warnings
in bold are good, but I would say the degree of need for attention
are more like this:
error (failed tests - you should look into it)
skip (skipped - perhaps you need more packages?)
warn (expected failure - you may want to look into fixing it someday)
info
pass
The "expected_failure" cases painted in "warn" are all long-known
failures; I do not think reminding about them in "bold" over and
over will help encouraging the developers take a look at them.
The "skipped" cases fall into two categories. Either you already
know you choose to not to care (e.g. I do not expect to use git-p4
and decided not to install p4 anywhere, so I may have t98?? on
GIT_SKIP_TESTS environment) or you haven't reached that point on a
new system and haven't realized that you didn't install a package
needed to run tests you care about (e.g. cvsserver tests would not
run without Perl interface to SQLite). For the former, the bold
output is merely distracting; for the latter, bold _might_ help in
this case.
At least, I think
GIT_SKIP_TESTS=t98?? sh t9800-git-p4-basic.sh -v
should paint "skipping test t9800 altogether" (emitted with "-v) and
the last line "1..0 # SKIP skip all tests in t9800" both in the same
"info" color.
How about going further to reduce "bold" a bit more, like this?
diff --git a/t/test-lib.sh b/t/test-lib.sh
index aaf013e..2bbb81d 100644
--- a/t/test-lib.sh
+++ b/t/test-lib.sh
@@ -182,13 +182,13 @@ then
error)
tput bold; tput setaf 1;; # bold red
skip)
- tput bold; tput setaf 4;; # bold blue
+ tput setaf 4;; # bold blue
warn)
- tput bold; tput setaf 3;; # bold brown/yellow
+ tput setaf 3;; # bold brown/yellow
pass)
tput setaf 2;; # green
info)
- tput bold; tput setaf 6;; # bold cyan
+ tput setaf 6;; # bold cyan
*)
test -n "$quiet" && return;;
esac
@@ -589,7 +589,7 @@ for skp in $GIT_SKIP_TESTS
do
case "$this_test" in
$skp)
- say_color skip >&3 "skipping test $this_test altogether"
+ say_color info >&3 "skipping test $this_test altogether"
skip_all="skip all tests in $this_test"
test_done
esac
^ permalink raw reply related
* Re: Q: do people compile with NO_FNMATCH on OpenBSD 5.2?
From: Greg Troxel @ 2012-12-20 18:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Junio C Hamano; +Cc: git, Arnout Engelen
In-Reply-To: <7vzk1bdqy0.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 629 bytes --]
[mkstemp truncating output on error]
diff --git c/wrapper.c w/wrapper.c
index 68739aa..a066e2e 100644
--- c/wrapper.c
+++ w/wrapper.c
@@ -229,7 +229,7 @@ int xmkstemp(char *template)
int saved_errno = errno;
const char *nonrelative_template;
- if (!template[0])
+ if (strlen(template) != strlen(origtemplate))
template = origtemplate;
nonrelative_template = absolute_path(template);
Thanks for the quick fix.
I applied this patch to 1.8.0.1, and then the tests get all the way to
t1402 (separate msg when I figure out why).
[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 194 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: RFC: "git config -l" should not expose sensitive information
From: Junio C Hamano @ 2012-12-20 18:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Michael Haggerty; +Cc: Jeff King, Toralf Förster, git
In-Reply-To: <50D33409.1050309@alum.mit.edu>
Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu> writes:
> I think the problem is yet another step earlier: why do we build tools
> that encourage people to store passwords in plaintext in a configuration
> file that is by default world-readable?
True. This particular one mentioned in the thread predates
credential helpers, so it is not faire to say "encourage".
We didn't and we don't.
Care to do a patch to deprecate sendemail.smtppass (i.e. give
warnings to users when it is used) and perhaps replace it with
something based on the credential store or something?
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: RFC: "git config -l" should not expose sensitive information
From: Junio C Hamano @ 2012-12-20 18:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jeff King; +Cc: git, Toralf Förster
In-Reply-To: <20121220155229.GA6008@sigill.intra.peff.net>
Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:
> Yeah. Thanks for a dose of sanity. I was really trying not to say "the
> given advice is bad, and we cannot help those people". But I think you
> are right; the only sensible path is for the user to inspect the output
> before posting it.
True.
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: $PATH pollution and t9902-completion.sh
From: Junio C Hamano @ 2012-12-20 18:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jeff King; +Cc: Adam Spiers, git mailing list
In-Reply-To: <20121220145519.GB27211@sigill.intra.peff.net>
Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:
> 2. Loosen the test to look for the presence of "checkout", but not
> fail when other items are present. Bonus points if it makes sure
> that everything returned starts with "check".
>
> I think (2) is the ideal solution in terms of behavior, but writing it
> may be more of a pain.
Yeah, I think (2) is the way to go.
^ permalink raw reply
* [PATCH] builtin/clean.c: Fix some sparse warnings
From: Ramsay Jones @ 2012-12-20 18:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: zoltan.klinger; +Cc: Junio C Hamano, GIT Mailing-list
Sparse issues two "Using plain integer as NULL pointer" warnings
(lines 41 and 47).
The first warning relates to the initializer expression in the
declaration for the 'char *dir' variable. In order to suppress
the warning, we simply replace the zero initializer with NULL.
The second warning relates to an expression, as part of an if
conditional, using the equality operator to compare the 'dir'
variable to zero. In order to suppress the warning, we replace
the 'dir == 0' expression with the more idiomatic '!dir'.
Signed-off-by: Ramsay Jones <ramsay@ramsay1.demon.co.uk>
---
Hi Zoltan,
If you have already updated your patch and made this redundant
(it's been a few days since I read the list or fetched git.git),
please ignore this. Otherwise, could you please squash this into
the new version of commit 16e4033e6 ("git-clean: Display more
accurate delete messages", 17-12-2012).
[BTW, in the same conditional expression you have an strncmp()
call which doesn't quite follow the style/conventions of the
existing code.]
Thanks!
ATB,
Ramsay Jones
builtin/clean.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/builtin/clean.c b/builtin/clean.c
index 1c25a75..0c603c8 100644
--- a/builtin/clean.c
+++ b/builtin/clean.c
@@ -38,13 +38,13 @@ static void print_filtered(const char *msg, struct string_list *lst)
{
int i;
char *name;
- char *dir = 0;
+ char *dir = NULL;
sort_string_list(lst);
for (i = 0; i < lst->nr; i++) {
name = lst->items[i].string;
- if (dir == 0 || strncmp(name, dir, strlen(dir)) != 0)
+ if (!dir || strncmp(name, dir, strlen(dir)) != 0)
printf("%s %s\n", msg, name);
if (name[strlen(name) - 1] == '/')
dir = name;
--
1.8.0
^ permalink raw reply related
* Re: Python version auditing followup
From: Junio C Hamano @ 2012-12-20 18:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Eric S. Raymond; +Cc: git
In-Reply-To: <20121220143411.BEA0744105@snark.thyrsus.com>
esr@thyrsus.com (Eric S. Raymond) writes:
> That was the first of three patches I have promised. In order to do
> the next one, which will be a development guidelines recommend
> compatibility back to some specific version X, I need a policy
> decision. How do we set X?
>
> I don't think X can be < 2.4, nor does it need to be - 2.4 came out
> in 2004 and eight years is plenty of deployment time.
>
> The later we set it, the more convenient for developers. But of
> course by setting it late we trade away some portability to
> older systems.
>
> In previous discussion of this issue I recommended X = 2.6.
> That is still my recommendation. Thoughts, comments, objections?
I personally would think 2.6 is recent enough. Which platforms that
are long-term-maintained by their vendors still pin their Python at
2.4.X? 2.4.6 was in 2008 that was source only, 2.4.4 was in late
2006 that was the last 2.4 with binary release.
Objections? Comments?
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: [PATCH] Python scripts audited for minimum compatible version and checks added.
From: Junio C Hamano @ 2012-12-20 18:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: esr; +Cc: Jeff King, git
In-Reply-To: <20121220150252.GA24387@thyrsus.com>
"Eric S. Raymond" <esr@thyrsus.com> writes:
>> Should the error message say ciabot.py?
>>
>> -Peff
>
> Gack. Yes. Thaty's what I get for cut-and-pasting too quickly.
> The information about xnml.sex is correct, though.
>
> Want me to resubmit, or will you just patch it?
Can handle it myself; thanks for the patch.
> Note by the way that I still think the entire ciabot subtree (which is
> my code) should just be nuked. CIA is not coming back, wishful thinking
> on Ilkotech's web page notwithstanding.
You are probably right, and interested people could send a patch to
resurrect it, if it turns necessary, from our last commit that has
it. So let's apply this patch, and then remove the subtree soon
after 1.8.1 ships.
^ permalink raw reply
* [PATCH] Highlight the link target line in Gitweb using CSS
From: Matthew Blissett @ 2012-12-20 18:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: git; +Cc: Matthew Blissett
This is useful when a Gitweb link with a target (like #l100) refers to
a line in the last screenful of text. Highlight the background in
yellow, and display a ⚓ character on the left. Show the same
highlight when hovering the mouse over a line number.
Signed-off-by: Matthew Blissett <matt@blissett.me.uk>
---
The background-colour change is the 'main' (tiny) change.
Consider the ::before part a suggestion. I think it helps show the
target line, but it does overlap the first character of any line >999.
I've tested this on the browsers I have access to, which excludes
Internet Explorer. Since it's cosmetic it shouldn't matter if it doesn't
work.
Wikipedia use similar CSS for their citation links:
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Git_(software)#cite_note-1>
gitweb/static/gitweb.css | 10 ++++++++++
1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)
diff --git a/gitweb/static/gitweb.css b/gitweb/static/gitweb.css
index cb86d2d..9f54311 100644
--- a/gitweb/static/gitweb.css
+++ b/gitweb/static/gitweb.css
@@ -546,6 +546,16 @@ a.linenr {
text-decoration: none
}
+a.linenr:hover, a.linenr:target {
+ color: #444444;
+ background-color: #ff4;
+}
+
+a.linenr:hover::before, a.linenr:target::before {
+ content: '⚓';
+ position: absolute;
+}
+
a.rss_logo {
float: right;
padding: 3px 0px;
--
1.7.10.4
^ permalink raw reply related
* Re: [PATCH v6 0/7] make test output coloring more intuitive
From: Adam Spiers @ 2012-12-20 18:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jeff King; +Cc: Junio C Hamano, git list
In-Reply-To: <20121220161110.GA10605@sigill.intra.peff.net>
On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 4:11 PM, Jeff King <peff@peff.net> wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 03:44:53PM +0000, Adam Spiers wrote:
>> > diff --git a/t/test-lib.sh b/t/test-lib.sh
>> > index 256f1c6..31f59af 100644
>> > --- a/t/test-lib.sh
>> > +++ b/t/test-lib.sh
>> > @@ -227,7 +227,7 @@ then
>> > pass)
>> > tput setaf 2;; # green
>> > info)
>> > - tput bold; tput setaf 6;; # bold cyan
>> > + tput setaf 6;; # cyan
>> > *)
>> > test -n "$quiet" && return;;
>> > esac
>> >
>>
>> Good point, I forgot to check what it looked like with -v. Since this
>> series is already on v6, is there a more lightweight way of addressing
>> this tiny tweak than sending v7?
>
> It is ultimately up to Junio, but I suspect he would be OK if you just
> reposted patch 4/7 with the above squashed.
I'll do that if Junio is OK with that.
> Or even just said "I like
> this, please squash it into patch 4 (change info messages from
> yellow/brown to bold cyan).
Yes, I'm OK with this way too :) Of course "bold" would need to be dropped
from the commit message.
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: What's cooking in git.git (Dec 2012, #05; Tue, 18)
From: Junio C Hamano @ 2012-12-20 18:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jeff King; +Cc: git
In-Reply-To: <20121220145941.GC27211@sigill.intra.peff.net>
Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:
> On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 12:31:43PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
>> * jk/error-const-return (2012-12-15) 2 commits
>> - silence some -Wuninitialized false positives
>> - make error()'s constant return value more visible
>>
>> Help compilers' flow analysis by making it more explicit that
>> error() always returns -1, to reduce false "variable used
>> uninitialized" warnings.
>>
>> This is still an RFC.
>
> What's your opinion on this?
Ugly but not too much so, and it would be useful.
The only thing that makes it ugly is that it promises error() will
return -1 and nothing else forever, but at this point in the
evolution of the codebase, I think we are pretty much committed to
it anyway, so I do not think it is a problem.
^ permalink raw reply
* [PATCH] oneway_merge(): only lstat() when told to update worktree
From: Martin von Zweigbergk @ 2012-12-20 17:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: git; +Cc: Junio C Hamano, Martin von Zweigbergk
Although the subject line of 613f027 (read-tree -u one-way merge fix
to check out locally modified paths., 2006-05-15) mentions "read-tree
-u", it did not seem to check whether -u was in effect. Not checking
whether -u is in effect makes e.g. "read-tree --reset" lstat() the
worktree, even though the worktree stat should not matter for that
operation.
This speeds up e.g. "git reset" a little on the linux-2.6 repo (best
of five, warm cache):
Before After
real 0m0.288s 0m0.233s
user 0m0.190s 0m0.150s
sys 0m0.090s 0m0.080s
---
I am very unfamiliar with this part of git, so my attempt at a
motivation may be totally off.
I have another twenty-or-so patches to reset.c coming up that take the
timings down to around 90 ms, but this patch was quite unrelated to
that. Those other patches actually make this patch pointless for "git
reset" (it takes another path), but I hope this is still a good change
for other operations that use oneway_merge.
unpack-trees.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/unpack-trees.c b/unpack-trees.c
index 6d96366..61acc5e 100644
--- a/unpack-trees.c
+++ b/unpack-trees.c
@@ -1834,7 +1834,7 @@ int oneway_merge(struct cache_entry **src, struct unpack_trees_options *o)
if (old && same(old, a)) {
int update = 0;
- if (o->reset && !ce_uptodate(old) && !ce_skip_worktree(old)) {
+ if (o->reset && o->update && !ce_uptodate(old) && !ce_skip_worktree(old)) {
struct stat st;
if (lstat(old->name, &st) ||
ie_match_stat(o->src_index, old, &st, CE_MATCH_IGNORE_VALID|CE_MATCH_IGNORE_SKIP_WORKTREE))
--
1.8.0.1.240.ge8a1f5a
^ permalink raw reply related
* [PATCH] t9902: Be more specific when completing git-checkout
From: Torsten Bögershausen @ 2012-12-20 17:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: git; +Cc: tboegi
t9902 is trying to complete e.g.
"git --version check" into "git --version checkout"
If there are other binaries like
"git-check-email" or "git-check-ignore" in the PATH
one test case failes
By using "checkou" instead of "check" the test becomes
more future proof.
Signed-off-by: Torsten Bögershausen <tboegi@web.de>
---
t/t9902-completion.sh | 24 ++++++++++++------------
1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
diff --git a/t/t9902-completion.sh b/t/t9902-completion.sh
index 3cd53f8..0e0e2d1 100755
--- a/t/t9902-completion.sh
+++ b/t/t9902-completion.sh
@@ -192,19 +192,19 @@ test_expect_success 'general options' '
'
test_expect_success 'general options plus command' '
- test_completion "git --version check" "checkout " &&
- test_completion "git --paginate check" "checkout " &&
- test_completion "git --git-dir=foo check" "checkout " &&
- test_completion "git --bare check" "checkout " &&
+ test_completion "git --version checkou" "checkout " &&
+ test_completion "git --paginate checkou" "checkout " &&
+ test_completion "git --git-dir=foo checkou" "checkout " &&
+ test_completion "git --bare checkou" "checkout " &&
test_completion "git --help des" "describe " &&
- test_completion "git --exec-path=foo check" "checkout " &&
- test_completion "git --html-path check" "checkout " &&
- test_completion "git --no-pager check" "checkout " &&
- test_completion "git --work-tree=foo check" "checkout " &&
- test_completion "git --namespace=foo check" "checkout " &&
- test_completion "git --paginate check" "checkout " &&
- test_completion "git --info-path check" "checkout " &&
- test_completion "git --no-replace-objects check" "checkout "
+ test_completion "git --exec-path=foo checkou" "checkout " &&
+ test_completion "git --html-path checkou" "checkout " &&
+ test_completion "git --no-pager checkou" "checkout " &&
+ test_completion "git --work-tree=foo checkou" "checkout " &&
+ test_completion "git --namespace=foo checkou" "checkout " &&
+ test_completion "git --paginate checkou" "checkout " &&
+ test_completion "git --info-path checkou" "checkout " &&
+ test_completion "git --no-replace-objects checkou" "checkout "
'
test_expect_success 'setup for ref completion' '
--
1.8.0
^ permalink raw reply related
* Re: $PATH pollution and t9902-completion.sh
From: Torsten Bögershausen @ 2012-12-20 17:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Adam Spiers; +Cc: Jeff King, git mailing list
In-Reply-To: <CAOkDyE-J7sTJ-GefhteP1wy7WorqTRnj5nn0k6hd1dp0VJz5iQ@mail.gmail.com>
On 20.12.12 16:13, Adam Spiers wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 2:55 PM, Jeff King <peff@peff.net> wrote:
>> On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 01:05:38AM +0000, Adam Spiers wrote:
>>> t/t9902-completion.sh is currently failing for me because I happen to
>>> have a custom shell-script called git-check-email in ~/bin, which is
>>> on my $PATH. This is different to a similar-looking case reported
>>> recently, which was due to an unclean working tree:
>>>
>>> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/208085
>>>
>>> It's not unthinkable that in the future other tests could break for
>>> similar reasons. Therefore it would be good to sanitize $PATH in the
>>> test framework so that it cannot destabilize tests, although I am
>>> struggling to think of a good way of doing this. Naively stripping
>>> directories under $HOME would not protect against git "plugins" such
>>> as the above being installed into places like /usr/bin. Thoughts?
>>
>> I've run into this, too. I think sanitizing $PATH is the wrong approach.
>> The real problem is that the test is overly picky. Right now it is
>> failing because you happen to have "check-email" in your $PATH, but it
>> will also need to be adjusted when a true "check-email" command is added
>> to git.
>>
>> I can think of two other options:
>>
>> 1. Make the test input more specific (e.g., looking for "checkou").
>> This doesn't eliminate the problem, but makes it less likely
>> to occur.
>>
>> 2. Loosen the test to look for the presence of "checkout", but not
>> fail when other items are present. Bonus points if it makes sure
>> that everything returned starts with "check".
>>
>> I think (2) is the ideal solution in terms of behavior, but writing it
>> may be more of a pain.
>
> I agree with all your points. Thanks for the suggestions.
I volonteer for 1) (and we got for 2) later)
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: [RFC] test: Old shells and physical paths
From: David Michael @ 2012-12-20 16:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: David Aguilar; +Cc: Junio C Hamano, git@vger.kernel.org
In-Reply-To: <CAJDDKr78ugSo9hNerHO0Y46_bSzLJWznB3E3+6H98NjMtBwHsw@mail.gmail.com>
Hi,
On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 12:01 AM, David Aguilar <davvid@gmail.com> wrote:
> Do you know if the differences are relegated to "cd",
> or do other common commands such as awk, grep, sed, mktemp, expr,
> etc. have similar issues?
There are almost certainly going to be incompatibilities with other
commands. The system implemented UNIX95 plus some extensions, then
they began supporting UNIX03/SUSv3/POSIX.1-2001/whatever for certain
commands by using an environment variable to toggle between the
incompatible behaviors.
Their documentation on the UNIX03 commands indicates it is still only
partially supported. For example: "cp" supports "-L" and "-P", but
"cd" doesn't.
> I wonder if it'd be helpful to have a low-numbered test that checks
> the basics needed by the scripted Porcelains and test suite.
> It would give us an easy way to answer these questions, and could
> be a good way to document (in code) the capabilities we expect.
I'd be in favor of something like this as well.
Thanks.
David
P.S.
In the meantime, I am handling the "cd" situation by replacing "-P"
with "$PHYS" and prepending the following to t/test-lib.sh.
set +o logical >/dev/null 2>&1 || PHYS=-P
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: RFC: "git config -l" should not expose sensitive information
From: Toralf Förster @ 2012-12-20 16:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jeff King, git
In-Reply-To: <20121220154915.GA5162@pug.qqx.org>
yep - understood
On 12/20/2012 04:49 PM, Aaron Schrab wrote:
> At 10:04 -0500 20 Dec 2012, Jeff King <peff@peff.net> wrote:
>> The problem seems to be that people are giving bad advice to tell
>> people to post "git config -l" output without looking at. Maybe we
>> could help them with a "git config --share-config" option that dumps
>> all config, but sanitizes the output. It would need to have a list of
>> sensitive keys (which does not exist yet), and would need to not just
>> mark up things like smtppass, but would also need to pull credential
>> information out of remote.*.url strings. And maybe more (I haven't
>> thought too long on it).
>
> If such an option is added, it is likely to cause more people to think
> that there is no need to examine the output before sharing it. But, I
> don't think that the sanitizing could ever be sufficient to guarantee that.
>
> Tools outside of the core git tree may add support for new config keys
> which are meant to contain sensitive information, and there would be no
> way for `git config` to know about those.
>
> Even for known sensitive keys, the person entering it might have made a
> typo in the name (e.g. smptpass) preventing it from being recognized as
> sensitive by the software, but easily recognizable as such by a human.
>
> There's also the problem of varying opinions on what is considered as
> sensitive. You mention credential information in URLs, but some people
> may consider the entire URL as something which they would not want to
> expose.
>
> I think that attempting to do this would only result in a false sense of
> security.
>
--
MfG/Sincerely
Toralf Förster
pgp finger print: 7B1A 07F4 EC82 0F90 D4C2 8936 872A E508 7DB6 9DA3
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: [PATCH v6 0/7] make test output coloring more intuitive
From: Jeff King @ 2012-12-20 16:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Adam Spiers; +Cc: Junio C Hamano, git list
In-Reply-To: <CAOkDyE9y6JvNKTCBoJqu47Hn-3axfjZPUdBhf4bOEfSP-9Q84A@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 03:44:53PM +0000, Adam Spiers wrote:
> > diff --git a/t/test-lib.sh b/t/test-lib.sh
> > index 256f1c6..31f59af 100644
> > --- a/t/test-lib.sh
> > +++ b/t/test-lib.sh
> > @@ -227,7 +227,7 @@ then
> > pass)
> > tput setaf 2;; # green
> > info)
> > - tput bold; tput setaf 6;; # bold cyan
> > + tput setaf 6;; # cyan
> > *)
> > test -n "$quiet" && return;;
> > esac
> >
>
> Good point, I forgot to check what it looked like with -v. Since this
> series is already on v6, is there a more lightweight way of addressing
> this tiny tweak than sending v7?
It is ultimately up to Junio, but I suspect he would be OK if you just
reposted patch 4/7 with the above squashed. Or even just said "I like
this, please squash it into patch 4 (change info messages from
yellow/brown to bold cyan).
As an aside, it made me wonder how hard/useful it would be to color the
snippets even more. Doing this:
diff --git a/t/test-lib-functions.sh b/t/test-lib-functions.sh
index f9ccbf2..3d44a94 100644
--- a/t/test-lib-functions.sh
+++ b/t/test-lib-functions.sh
@@ -364,7 +364,12 @@ test_expect_success () {
export test_prereq
if ! test_skip "$@"
then
- say >&3 "expecting success: $2"
+ if test -z "$GIT_TEST_HIGHLIGHT"; then
+ say >&3 "expecting success: $2"
+ else
+ say >&3 "expecting success:"
+ echo "$2" | eval "$GIT_TEST_HIGHLIGHT"
+ fi
if test_run_ "$2"
then
test_ok_ "$1"
produces highlighted snippets with:
GIT_TEST_HIGHLIGHT='highlight -S sh -O ansi'
or
GIT_TEST_HIGHLIGHT='pygmentize -l sh'
depending on what you have installed on your system. I'm not convinced
it actually adds anything, but it's a fun toy. A real patch would
probably turn it off in non-verbose mode, as invoking the highlighter
(especially pygmentize) repeatedly is somewhat expensive.
-Peff
^ permalink raw reply related
* Re: RFC: "git config -l" should not expose sensitive information
From: Jeff King @ 2012-12-20 15:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Michael Haggerty; +Cc: Toralf Förster, git
In-Reply-To: <50D33409.1050309@alum.mit.edu>
On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 04:51:37PM +0100, Michael Haggerty wrote:
> > The problem seems to be that people are giving bad advice to tell people
> > to post "git config -l" output without looking at. Maybe we could help
> > them with a "git config --share-config" option that dumps all config,
> > but sanitizes the output. It would need to have a list of sensitive keys
> > (which does not exist yet), and would need to not just mark up things
> > like smtppass, but would also need to pull credential information out of
> > remote.*.url strings. And maybe more (I haven't thought too long on it).
>
> I think the problem is yet another step earlier: why do we build tools
> that encourage people to store passwords in plaintext in a configuration
> file that is by default world-readable?
Agreed. Most of it is hysterical raisins. We did not have any portable
secure storage for a long time. These days we have the credential helper
subsystem, which send-email can and should be using.
-Peff
^ permalink raw reply
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