Test fixes.
* sg/test-must-be-empty:
tests: use 'test_must_be_empty' instead of 'test_cmp <empty> <out>'
tests: use 'test_must_be_empty' instead of 'test_cmp /dev/null <out>'
tests: use 'test_must_be_empty' instead of 'test ! -s'
tests: use 'test_must_be_empty' instead of '! test -s'
Using 'test_must_be_empty' is shorter and more idiomatic than
>empty &&
test_cmp empty out
as it saves the creation of an empty file. Furthermore, sometimes the
expected empty file doesn't have such a descriptive name like 'empty',
and its creation is far away from the place where it's finally used
for comparison (e.g. in 't7600-merge.sh', where two expected empty
files are created in the 'setup' test, but are used only about 500
lines later).
These cases were found by instrumenting 'test_cmp' to error out the
test script when it's used to compare empty files, and then converted
manually.
Note that even after this patch there still remain a lot of cases
where we use 'test_cmp' to check empty files:
- Sometimes the expected output is not hard-coded in the test, but
'test_cmp' is used to ensure that two similar git commands produce
the same output, and that output happens to be empty, e.g. the
test 'submodule update --merge - ignores --merge for new
submodules' in 't7406-submodule-update.sh'.
- Repetitive common tasks, including preparing the expected results
and running 'test_cmp', are often extracted into a helper
function, and some of this helper's callsites expect no output.
- For the same reason as above, the whole 'test_expect_success'
block is within a helper function, e.g. in 't3070-wildmatch.sh'.
- Or 'test_cmp' is invoked in a loop, e.g. the test 'cvs update
(-p)' in 't9400-git-cvsserver-server.sh'.
Signed-off-by: SZEDER Gábor <szeder.dev@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Change various tests that use an idiom of the form:
>expect &&
test_cmp expect actual
To instead use:
test_must_be_empty actual
The test_must_be_empty() wrapper was introduced in ca8d148daf ("test:
test_must_be_empty helper", 2013-06-09). Many of these tests have been
added after that time. This was mostly found with, and manually pruned
from:
git grep '^\s+>.*expect.* &&$' t
Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Add test cases to cover the new X509/gpgsm support. Most of them
resemble existing ones. They just switch the format to x509 and set the
signingkey when creating signatures. Validation of signatures does not
need any configuration of git, it does need gpgsm to be configured to
trust the key(-chain).
Several of the testcases build on top of existing gpg testcases.
The commit ships a self-signed key for committer@example.com and
configures gpgsm to trust it.
Signed-off-by: Henning Schild <henning.schild@siemens.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The code did not propagate the terminal width to subprocesses via
COLUMNS environment variable, which it now does. This caused
trouble to "git column" helper subprocess when "git tag --column=row"
tried to list the existing tags on a display with non-default width.
* nd/term-columns:
column: fix off-by-one default width
pager: set COLUMNS to term_columns()
By default we want to fill the whole screen if possible, but we do not
want to use up _all_ terminal columns because the last character is
going hit the border, push the cursor over and wrap. Keep it at
default value zero, which will make print_columns() set the width at
term_columns() - 1.
This affects the test in t7004 because effective column width before
was 40 but now 39 so we need to compensate it by one or the output at
39 columns has a different layout.
Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
A signed tag has a detached signature like this:
object ...
[...more header...]
This is the tag body.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
[opaque gpg data]
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Our parser finds the _first_ line that appears to start a
PGP signature block, meaning we may be confused by a
signature (or a signature-like line) in the actual body.
Let's keep parsing and always find the final block, which
should be the detached signature over all of the preceding
content.
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Ben Toews <mastahyeti@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
We have a series of tests which create signed tags with
various properties, but one test accidentally verifies a tag
from much earlier in the series.
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Ben Toews <mastahyeti@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Add a --edit option whichs allows modifying the messages provided by -m or -F,
the same way git commit --edit does.
Signed-off-by: Nicolas Morey-Chaisemartin <NMoreyChaisemartin@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
This is the "theoretically more correct" approach of simply
stepping back to the state before plumbing commands started paying
attention to "color.ui" configuration variable.
Let's run with this one.
* jk/ref-filter-colors-fix:
tag: respect color.ui config
Revert "color: check color.ui in git_default_config()"
Revert "t6006: drop "always" color config tests"
Revert "color: make "always" the same as "auto" in config"
Since 11b087adfd (ref-filter: consult want_color() before
emitting colors, 2017-07-13), we expect that setting
"color.ui" to "always" will enable color tag formats even
without a tty. As that commit was built on top of
136c8c8b8f (color: check color.ui in git_default_config(),
2017-07-13) from the same series, we didn't need to touch
tag's config parsing at all.
However, since we reverted 136c8c8b8f, we now need to
explicitly call git_color_default_config() to make this
work.
Let's do so, and also restore the test dropped in 0c88bf5050
(provide --color option for all ref-filter users,
2017-10-03). That commit swapped out our "color.ui=always"
test for "--color" in preparation for "always" going away.
But since it is here to stay, we should test both cases.
Note that for-each-ref also lost its color.ui support as
part of reverting 136c8c8b8f. But as a plumbing command, it
should _not_ respect the color.ui config. Since it also
gained a --color option in 0c88bf5050, that's the correct
way to ask it for color. We'll continue to test that, and
confirm that "color.ui" is not respected.
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
* 'jk/ui-color-always-to-auto-maint' (early part):
color: make "always" the same as "auto" in config
provide --color option for all ref-filter users
t3205: use --color instead of color.branch=always
t3203: drop "always" color test
t6006: drop "always" color config tests
t7502: use diff.noprefix for --verbose test
t7508: use test_terminal for color output
t3701: use test-terminal to collect color output
t4015: prefer --color to -c color.diff=always
test-terminal: set TERM=vt100
* jk/ui-color-always-to-auto-maint:
color: make "always" the same as "auto" in config
provide --color option for all ref-filter users
t3205: use --color instead of color.branch=always
t3203: drop "always" color test
t6006: drop "always" color config tests
t7502: use diff.noprefix for --verbose test
t7508: use test_terminal for color output
t3701: use test-terminal to collect color output
t4015: prefer --color to -c color.diff=always
test-terminal: set TERM=vt100
When ref-filter learned about want_color() in 11b087adfd
(ref-filter: consult want_color() before emitting colors,
2017-07-13), it became useful to be able to turn colors off
and on for specific commands. For git-branch, you can do so
with --color/--no-color.
But for git-for-each-ref and git-tag, the other users of
ref-filter, you have no option except to tweak the
"color.ui" config setting. Let's give both of these commands
the usual color command-line options.
This is a bit more obvious as a method for overriding the
config. And it also prepares us for the behavior of "always"
changing (so that we are still left with a way of forcing
color when our output goes to a non-terminal).
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The point of the test-terminal script is to simulate in the
test scripts an environment where output is going to a real
terminal.
But since test-lib.sh also sets TERM=dumb, the simulation
isn't very realistic. The color code will skip auto-coloring
for TERM=dumb, leading to us liberally sprinkling
test_terminal env TERM=vt100 git ...
through the test suite to convince the tests to actually
generate colors. Let's set TERM for programs run under
test_terminal, which is one less thing for test-writers to
remember.
In most cases the callers can be simplified, but note there
is one interesting case in t4202. It uses test_terminal to
check the auto-enabling of --decorate, but the expected
output _doesn't_ contain colors (because TERM=dumb
suppresses them). Using TERM=vt100 is closer to what the
real world looks like; adjust the expected output to match.
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
On cygwin (and MinGW), the 'ulimit' built-in bash command does not have
the desired effect of limiting the resources of new processes, at least
for the stack and file descriptors. However, it always returns success
and leads to several test prerequisites being erroneously set to true.
Add a check for cygwin and MinGW to the prerequisite expressions, using
a 'test_have_prereq !MINGW,!CYGWIN' clause, to guard against using ulimit.
This affects the prerequisite expressions for the ULIMIT_STACK_SIZE,
CMDLINE_LIMIT and ULIMIT_FILE_DESCRIPTORS prerequisites.
Signed-off-by: Ramsay Jones <ramsay@ramsayjones.plus.com>
Reviewed-by: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The lazy prerequisite ULIMIT_STACK_SIZE is used only in t7004 so far.
Move it to test-lib.sh so that it can be used in other tests (which it will
be in a follow-up commit).
Signed-off-by: Michael J Gruber <git@grubix.eu>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Change an argument to test_line_count (which'll ultimately be turned
into a "test" expression) to use "-gt" instead of ">" for an
arithmetic test.
This broken on e.g. OpenBSD as of v2.13.0 with my commit
ac3f5a3468 ("ref-filter: add --no-contains option to
tag/branch/for-each-ref", 2017-03-24).
Downstream just worked around it by patching git and didn't tell us
about it, I discovered this when reading various Git packaging
implementations: https://github.com/openbsd/ports/commit/7e48bf88a20
Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
When color placeholders like %(color:red) are used in a
ref-filter format, we unconditionally output the colors,
even if the user has asked us for no colors. This usually
isn't a problem when the user is constructing a --format on
the command line, but it means we may do the wrong thing
when the format is fed from a script or alias. For example:
$ git config alias.b 'branch --format=%(color:green)%(refname)'
$ git b --no-color
should probably omit the green color. Likewise, running:
$ git b >branches
should probably also omit the color, just as we would for
all baked-in coloring (and as we recently started to do for
user-specified colors in --pretty formats).
This commit makes both of those cases work by teaching
the ref-filter code to consult want_color() before
outputting any color. The color flag in ref_format defaults
to "-1", which means we'll consult color.ui, which in turn
defaults to the usual isatty() check on stdout. However,
callers like git-branch which support their own color config
(and command-line options) can override that.
The new tests independently cover all three of the callers
of ref-filter (for-each-ref, tag, and branch). Even though
these seem redundant, it confirms that we've correctly
plumbed through all of the necessary config to make colors
work by default.
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The GETTEXT_POISON=YesPlease compile-time testing option added in my
bb946bba76 ("i18n: add GETTEXT_POISON to simulate unfriendly
translator", 2011-02-22) has been slowly bitrotting as strings have
been marked for translation, and new tests have been added without
running it.
I brought this up on the list ("[BUG] test suite broken with
GETTEXT_POISON=YesPlease", [1]) asking whether this mode was useful at
all anymore. At least one person occasionally uses it, and Lars
Schneider offered to change one of the the Travis builds to run in
this mode, so fix up the failing ones.
My test setup runs most of the tests, with the notable exception of
skipping all the p4 tests, so it's possible that there's still some
lurking regressions I haven't fixed.
1. <CACBZZX62+acvi1dpkknadTL827mtCm_QesGSZ=6+UnyeMpg8+Q@mail.gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
"git tag/branch/for-each-ref" family of commands long allowed to
filter the refs by "--contains X" (show only the refs that are
descendants of X), "--merged X" (show only the refs that are
ancestors of X), "--no-merged X" (show only the refs that are not
ancestors of X). One curious omission, "--no-contains X" (show
only the refs that are not descendants of X) has been added to
them.
* ab/ref-filter-no-contains:
tag: add tests for --with and --without
ref-filter: reflow recently changed branch/tag/for-each-ref docs
ref-filter: add --no-contains option to tag/branch/for-each-ref
tag: change --point-at to default to HEAD
tag: implicitly supply --list given another list-like option
tag: change misleading --list <pattern> documentation
parse-options: add OPT_NONEG to the "contains" option
tag: add more incompatibles mode tests
for-each-ref: partly change <object> to <commit> in help
tag tests: fix a typo in a test description
tag: remove a TODO item from the test suite
ref-filter: add test for --contains on a non-commit
ref-filter: make combining --merged & --no-merged an error
tag doc: reword --[no-]merged to talk about commits, not tips
tag doc: split up the --[no-]merged documentation
tag doc: move the description of --[no-]merged earlier
A few unterminated here documents in tests were fixed, which in
turn revealed incorrect expectations the tests make. These tests
have been updated.
* st/verify-tag:
t7004, t7030: fix here-doc syntax errors
Change the test suite to test for these synonyms for --contains and
--no-contains, respectively.
Before this change there were no tests for them at all. This doesn't
exhaustively test for them as well as their --contains and
--no-contains synonyms, but at least it's something.
Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Change the tag, branch & for-each-ref commands to have a --no-contains
option in addition to their longstanding --contains options.
This allows for finding the last-good rollout tag given a known-bad
<commit>. Given a hypothetically bad commit cf5c7253e0, the git
version to revert to can be found with this hacky two-liner:
(git tag -l 'v[0-9]*'; git tag -l --contains cf5c7253e0 'v[0-9]*') |
sort | uniq -c | grep -E '^ *1 ' | awk '{print $2}' | tail -n 10
With this new --no-contains option the same can be achieved with:
git tag -l --no-contains cf5c7253e0 'v[0-9]*' | sort | tail -n 10
As the filtering machinery is shared between the tag, branch &
for-each-ref commands, implement this for those commands too. A
practical use for this with "branch" is e.g. finding branches which
were branched off between v2.8.0 and v2.10.0:
git branch --contains v2.8.0 --no-contains v2.10.0
The "describe" command also has a --contains option, but its semantics
are unrelated to what tag/branch/for-each-ref use --contains for. A
--no-contains option for "describe" wouldn't make any sense, other
than being exactly equivalent to not supplying --contains at all,
which would be confusing at best.
Add a --without option to "tag" as an alias for --no-contains, for
consistency with --with and --contains. The --with option is
undocumented, and possibly the only user of it is
Junio (<xmqqefy71iej.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>). But it's
trivial to support, so let's do that.
The additions to the the test suite are inverse copies of the
corresponding --contains tests. With this change --no-contains for
tag, branch & for-each-ref is just as well tested as the existing
--contains option.
In addition to those tests, add a test for "tag" which asserts that
--no-contains won't find tree/blob tags, which is slightly
unintuitive, but consistent with how --contains works & is documented.
Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Change the --points-at option to default to HEAD for consistency with
its siblings --contains, --merged etc. which default to
HEAD. Previously we'd get:
$ git tag --points-at 2>&1 | head -n 1
error: option `points-at' requires a value
This changes behavior added in commit ae7706b9ac (tag: add --points-at
list option, 2012-02-08).
Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Change the "tag" command to implicitly turn on its --list mode when
provided with a list-like option such as --contains, --points-at etc.
This is for consistency with how "branch" works. When "branch" is
given a list-like option, such as --contains, it implicitly provides
--list. Before this change "tag" would error out on those sorts of
invocations. I.e. while both of these worked for "branch":
git branch --contains v2.8.0 <pattern>
git branch --list --contains v2.8.0 <pattern>
Only the latter form worked for "tag":
git tag --contains v2.8.0 '*rc*'
git tag --list --contains v2.8.0 '*rc*'
Now "tag", like "branch", will implicitly supply --list when a
list-like option is provided, and no other conflicting non-list
options (such as -d) are present on the command-line.
Spelunking through the history via:
git log --reverse -p -G'only allowed with' -- '*builtin*tag*c'
Reveals that there was no good reason for not allowing this in the
first place. The --contains option added in 32c35cfb1e ("git-tag: Add
--contains option", 2009-01-26) made this an error. All the other
subsequent list-like options that were added copied its pattern of
making this usage an error.
The only tests that break as a result of this change are tests that
were explicitly checking that this "branch-like" usage wasn't
permitted. Change those failing tests to check that this invocation
mode is permitted, add extra tests for the list-like options we
weren't testing, and tests to ensure that e.g. we don't toggle the
list mode in the presence of other conflicting non-list options.
With this change errors messages such as "--contains option is only
allowed with -l" don't make sense anymore, since options like
--contain turn on -l. Instead we error out when list-like options such
as --contain are used in conjunction with conflicting options such as
-d or -v.
Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Change the documentation for --list so that it's described as a
toggle, not as an option that takes a <pattern> as an argument.
Junio initially documented this in b867c7c23a ("git-tag: -l to list
tags (usability).", 2006-02-17), but later Jeff King changed "tag" to
accept multiple patterns in 588d0e834b ("tag: accept multiple patterns
for --list", 2011-06-20).
However, documenting this as "-l <pattern>" was never correct, as
these both worked before Jeff's change:
git tag -l 'v*'
git tag 'v*' -l
One would expect an option that was documented like that to only
accept:
git tag --list
git tag --list 'v*rc*'
And after Jeff's change, one that took multiple patterns:
git tag --list 'v*rc*' --list '*2.8*'
But since it's actually a toggle all of these work as well, and
produce identical output to the last example above:
git tag --list 'v*rc*' '*2.8*'
git tag --list 'v*rc*' '*2.8*' --list --list --list
git tag --list 'v*rc*' '*2.8*' --list -l --list -l --list
Now the documentation is more in tune with how the "branch" command
describes its --list option since commit cddd127b9a ("branch:
introduce --list option", 2011-08-28).
Change the test suite to assert that these invocations work for the
cases that weren't already being tested for.
Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Amend the test suite to test for more invalid uses like "-l -a"
etc.
This change tests the code path in builtin/tag.c between lines:
if (argc == 0 && !cmdmode)
And:
if ((create_tag_object || force) && (cmdmode != 0))
Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Jan Palus noticed that some here-doc are spelled incorrectly,
resulting the entire remainder of the test snippet being slurped
into the "expect" file as if it were data, e.g. in this sequence
cat >expect <<EOF &&
... expectation ...
EOF
git $cmd_being_tested >actual &&
test_cmp expect actual
the last command of the test is "cat" that sends everything to
'expect' and succeeds.
Fixing these issues in t7004 and t7030 reveals that "git tag -v"
and "git verify-tag" with their --format option do not work as the
test was expecting originally. Instead of showing both valid tags
and tags with incorrect signatures on their output, tags that do not
pass verification are omitted from the output. Another breakage that
is uncovered is that these tests must be restricted to environment
where gpg is available.
Arguably, that is a safer behaviour, and because the format
specifiers like %(tag) do not have a way to show if the signature
verifies correctly, the command with the --format option cannot be
used to get a list of tags annotated with their signature validity
anyway.
For now, let's fix the here-doc syntax, update the expectation to
match the reality, and update the test prerequisite.
Maybe later when we extend the --format language available to "git
tag -v" and "git verify-tag" to include things like "%(gpg:status)",
we may want to change the behaviour so that piping a list of tag
names into
xargs git verify-tag --format='%(gpg:status) %(tag)'
becomes a good way to produce such a list, but that is a separate
topic.
Noticed-by: Jan Palus <jan.palus@gmail.com>
Helped-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Santiago Torres <santiago@nyu.edu>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Change "suceed" to "succeed" in a test description. The typo has been
here since the code was originally added in commit ef5a6fb597 ("Add
test-script for git-tag", 2007-06-28).
Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Change the test for "git tag -l" to not have an associated TODO
comment saying that it should return non-zero if there's no tags.
This was added in commit ef5a6fb597 ("Add test-script for git-tag",
2007-06-28) when the tests for "tag" were initially added, but at this
point changing this would be inconsistent with how "git tag" is a
synonym for "git tag -l", and would needlessly break external code
that relies on this porcelain command.
Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Change the tag test suite to test for --contains on a tree & blob. It
only accepts commits and will spew out "<object> is a tree, not a
commit".
It's sufficient to test this just for the "tag" and "branch" commands,
because it covers all the machinery shared between "branch" and
"for-each-ref".
Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Change the behavior of specifying --merged & --no-merged to be an
error, instead of silently picking the option that was provided last.
Subsequent changes of mine add a --no-contains option in addition to
the existing --contains. Providing both of those isn't an error, and
has actual meaning.
Making its cousins have different behavior in this regard would be
confusing to the user, especially since we'd be silently disregarding
some of their command-line input.
Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
"git tag" did not leave useful message when adding a new entry to
reflog; this was left unnoticed for a long time because refs/tags/*
doesn't keep reflog by default.
* cw/tag-reflog-message:
tag: generate useful reflog message
When tags are created with `--create-reflog` or with the option
`core.logAllRefUpdates` set to 'always', a reflog is created for them.
So far, the description of reflog entries for tags was empty, making the
reflog hard to understand. For example:
6e3a7b3 refs/tags/test@{0}:
Now, a reflog message is generated when creating a tag, following the
pattern "tag: tagging <short-sha1> (<description>)". If
GIT_REFLOG_ACTION is set, the message becomes "$GIT_REFLOG_ACTION
(<description>)" instead. If the tag references a commit object, the
description is set to the subject line of the commit, followed by its
commit date. For example:
6e3a7b3 refs/tags/test@{0}: tag: tagging 6e3a7b3398 (Git 2.12-rc0, 2017-02-03)
If the tag points to a tree/blob/tag objects, the following static
strings are taken as description:
- "tree object"
- "blob object"
- "other tag object"
Signed-off-by: Cornelius Weig <cornelius.weig@tngtech.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The "core.logAllRefUpdates" that used to be boolean has been
enhanced to take 'always' as well, to record ref updates to refs
other than the ones that are expected to be updated (i.e. branches,
remote-tracking branches and notes).
* cw/log-updates-for-all-refs-really:
doc: add note about ignoring '--no-create-reflog'
update-ref: add test cases for bare repository
refs: add option core.logAllRefUpdates = always
config: add markup to core.logAllRefUpdates doc
"git tag" and "git verify-tag" learned to put GPG verification
status in their "--format=<placeholders>" output format.
* st/verify-tag:
t/t7004-tag: Add --format specifier tests
t/t7030-verify-tag: Add --format specifier tests
builtin/tag: add --format argument for tag -v
builtin/verify-tag: add --format to verify-tag
ref-filter: add function to print single ref_array_item
gpg-interface, tag: add GPG_VERIFY_OMIT_STATUS flag
When core.logallrefupdates is true, we only create a new reflog for refs
that are under certain well-known hierarchies. The reason is that we
know that some hierarchies (like refs/tags) are not meant to change, and
that unknown hierarchies might not want reflogs at all (e.g., a
hypothetical refs/foo might be meant to change often and drop old
history immediately).
However, sometimes it is useful to override this decision and simply log
for all refs, because the safety and audit trail is more important than
the performance implications of keeping the log around.
This patch introduces a new "always" mode for the core.logallrefupdates
option which will log updates to everything under refs/, regardless
where in the hierarchy it is (we still will not log things like
ORIG_HEAD and FETCH_HEAD, which are known to be transient).
Based-on-patch-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Cornelius Weig <cornelius.weig@tngtech.com>
Reviewed-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The prereleaseSuffix feature of version comparison that is used in
"git tag -l" did not correctly when two or more prereleases for the
same release were present (e.g. when 2.0, 2.0-beta1, and 2.0-beta2
are there and the code needs to compare 2.0-beta1 and 2.0-beta2).
* sg/fix-versioncmp-with-common-suffix:
versioncmp: generalize version sort suffix reordering
versioncmp: factor out helper for suffix matching
versioncmp: use earliest-longest contained suffix to determine sorting order
versioncmp: cope with common part overlapping with prerelease suffix
versioncmp: pass full tagnames to swap_prereleases()
t7004-tag: add version sort tests to show prerelease reordering issues
t7004-tag: use test_config helper
t7004-tag: delete unnecessary tags with test_when_finished
tag -v now supports --format specifiers to inspect the contents of a tag
upon verification. Add two tests to ensure this behavior is respected in
future changes.
Signed-off-by: Santiago Torres <santiago@nyu.edu>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The 'versionsort.prereleaseSuffix' configuration variable, as its name
suggests, is supposed to only deal with tagnames with prerelease
suffixes, and allows sorting those prerelease tags in a user-defined
order before the suffixless main release tag, instead of sorting them
simply lexicographically.
However, the previous changes in this series resulted in an
interesting and useful property of version sort:
- The empty string as a configured suffix matches all tagnames,
including tagnames without any suffix, but
- tagnames containing a "real" configured suffix are still ordered
according to that real suffix, because any longer suffix takes
precedence over the empty string.
Exploiting this property we can easily generalize suffix reordering
and specify the order of tags with given suffixes not only before but
even after a main release tag by using the empty suffix to denote the
position of the main release tag, without any algorithm changes:
$ git -c versionsort.prereleaseSuffix=-alpha \
-c versionsort.prereleaseSuffix=-beta \
-c versionsort.prereleaseSuffix="" \
-c versionsort.prereleaseSuffix=-gamma \
-c versionsort.prereleaseSuffix=-delta \
tag -l --sort=version:refname 'v3.0*'
v3.0-alpha1
v3.0-beta1
v3.0
v3.0-gamma1
v3.0-delta1
Since 'versionsort.prereleaseSuffix' is not a fitting name for a
configuration variable to control this more general suffix reordering,
introduce the new variable 'versionsort.suffix'. Still keep the old
configuration variable name as a deprecated alias, though, to avoid
suddenly breaking setups already using it. Ignore the old variable if
both old and new configuration variables are set, but emit a warning
so users will be aware of it and can fix their configuration. Extend
the documentation to describe and add a test to check this more
general behavior.
Note: since the empty suffix matches all tagnames, tagnames with
suffixes not included in the configuration are listed together with
the suffixless main release tag, ordered lexicographically right after
that, i.e. before tags with suffixes listed in the configuration
following the empty suffix.
Signed-off-by: SZEDER Gábor <szeder.dev@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
When comparing tagnames, it is possible that a tagname contains more
than one of the configured prerelease suffixes around the first
different character. After fixing a bug in the previous commit such a
tagname is sorted according to the contained suffix which comes first
in the configuration. This is, however, not quite the right thing to
do in the following corner cases:
1. $ git -c versionsort.suffix=-bar
-c versionsort.suffix=-foo-baz
-c versionsort.suffix=-foo-bar
tag -l --sort=version:refname 'v1*'
v1.0-foo-bar
v1.0-foo-baz
The suffix of the tagname 'v1.0-foo-bar' is clearly '-foo-bar',
so it should be listed last. However, as it also contains '-bar'
around the first different character, it is listed first instead,
because that '-bar' suffix comes first the configuration.
2. One of the configured suffixes starts with the other:
$ git -c versionsort.prereleasesuffix=-pre \
-c versionsort.prereleasesuffix=-prerelease \
tag -l --sort=version:refname 'v2*'
v2.0-prerelease1
v2.0-pre1
v2.0-pre2
Here the tagname 'v2.0-prerelease1' should be the last. When
comparing 'v2.0-pre1' and 'v2.0-prerelease1' the first different
characters are '1' and 'r', respectively. Since this first
different character must be part of the configured suffix, the
'-pre' suffix is not recognized in the first tagname. OTOH, the
'-prerelease' suffix is properly recognized in
'v2.0-prerelease1', thus it is listed first.
Improve version sort in these corner cases, and
- look for a configured prerelease suffix containing the first
different character or ending right before it, so the '-pre'
suffixes are recognized in case (2). This also means that
when comparing tagnames 'v2.0-pre1' and 'v2.0-pre2',
swap_prereleases() would find the '-pre' suffix in both, but then
it will return "undecided" and the caller will do the right thing
by sorting based in '1' and '2'.
- If the tagname contains more than one suffix, then give precedence
to the contained suffix that starts at the earliest offset in the
tagname to address (1).
- If there are more than one suffixes starting at that earliest
position, then give precedence to the longest of those suffixes,
thus ensuring that in (2) the tagname 'v2.0-prerelease1' won't be
sorted based on the '-pre' suffix.
Add tests for these corner cases and adjust the documentation
accordingly.
Signed-off-by: SZEDER Gábor <szeder.dev@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Version sort with prerelease reordering sometimes puts tagnames in the
wrong order, when the common part of two compared tagnames overlaps
with the leading character(s) of one or more configured prerelease
suffixes. Note the position of "v2.1.0-beta-1":
$ git -c versionsort.prereleaseSuffix=-beta \
tag -l --sort=version:refname v2.1.*
v2.1.0-beta-2
v2.1.0-beta-3
v2.1.0
v2.1.0-RC1
v2.1.0-RC2
v2.1.0-beta-1
v2.1.1
v2.1.2
The reason is that when comparing a pair of tagnames, first
versioncmp() looks for the first different character in a pair of
tagnames, and then the swap_prereleases() helper function looks for a
configured prerelease suffix _starting at_ that character. Thus, when
in the above example the sorting algorithm happens to compare the
tagnames "v2.1.0-beta-1" and "v2.1.0-RC2", swap_prereleases() tries to
match the suffix "-beta" against "beta-1" to no avail, and the two
tagnames erroneously end up being ordered lexicographically.
To fix this issue change swap_prereleases() to look for configured
prerelease suffixes _containing_ the position of that first different
character.
Care must be taken, when a configured suffix is longer than the
tagnames' common part up to the first different character, to avoid
reading memory before the beginning of the tagnames. Add a test that
uses an exceptionally long prerelease suffix to check for this, in the
hope that in case of a regression the illegal memory access causes a
segfault in 'git tag' on one of the commonly used platforms (the test
happens to pass successfully on my Linux system with the safety check
removed), or at least makes valgrind complain.
Under some circumstances it's possible that more than one prerelease
suffixes can be found in the same tagname around that first different
character. With this simple bugfix patch such a tagname is sorted
according to the contained suffix that comes first in the
configuration for now. This is less than ideal in some cases, and the
following patch will take care of those.
Reported-by: Leho Kraav <leho@conversionready.com>
Signed-off-by: SZEDER Gábor <szeder.dev@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Version sort with prerelease reordering sometimes puts tagnames in the
wrong order, when the common part of two compared tagnames ends with
the leading character(s) of one or more configured prerelease
suffixes. Add tests that demonstrate these issues.
The unrelated '--format should list tags as per format given' test
later uses tags matching the same prefix as the version sort tests,
thus was affected by the new tags added for the new tests in this
patch. Change that test to perform its checks on a different set of
tags.
Signed-off-by: SZEDER Gábor <szeder.dev@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
... instead of setting and then manually unsetting configuration
variables, on one occasion even outside the test_expect_success block.
Signed-off-by: SZEDER Gábor <szeder.dev@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The '--force is moot with a non-existing tag name' test creates two
new tags, which are then deleted right after the test is finished,
outside the test_expect_success block, allowing 'git tag -d's output to
pollute the test output.
Use test_when_finished to delete those tags.
Signed-off-by: SZEDER Gábor <szeder.dev@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
This options makes sorting ignore case, which is great when you have
branches named bug-12-do-something, Bug-12-do-some-more and
BUG-12-do-what and want to group them together. Sorting externally may
not be an option because we lose coloring and column layout from
git-branch and git-tag.
The same could be said for filtering, but it's probably less important
because you can always go with the ugly pattern [bB][uU][gG]-* if you're
desperate.
You can't have case-sensitive filtering and case-insensitive sorting (or
the other way around) with this though. For branch and tag, that should
be no problem. for-each-ref, as a plumbing, might want finer control.
But we can always add --{filter,sort}-ignore-case when there is a need
for it.
Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
