Across only three files, comments and a single function name used
'commitish' rather than 'commit-ish' or 'committish' as the spelling.
The git glossary accepts a hyphen or a double-t, but not a single-t.
Despite the typo in a translation file, none of the typos appear in
user-visible locations.
Signed-off-by: Pi Fisher <Pi.L.D.Fisher@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
git-branch(1) will error out if you give it a bad ref name. But the user
might not understand why or what part of the name is illegal.
The user might know that there are some limitations based on the *loose
ref* format (filenames), but there are also further rules for
easier integration with shell-based tools, pathname expansion, and
playing well with reference name expressions.
The man page for git-check-ref-format(1) contains these rules. Let’s
advise about it since that is not a command that you just happen
upon. Also make this advise configurable since you might not want to be
reminded every time you make a little typo.
Signed-off-by: Kristoffer Haugsbakk <code@khaugsbakk.name>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Similar to the preceding conversion of the AUTO_MERGE pseudo-ref, let's
convert the MERGE_AUTOSTASH ref to become a normal pseudo-ref as well.
Signed-off-by: Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
In 70c70de616 (refs: complete list of special refs, 2023-12-14) we have
inrtoduced a new `is_special_ref()` function that classifies some refs
as being special. The rule is that special refs are exclusively read and
written via the filesystem directly, whereas normal refs exclucsively go
via the refs API.
The intent of that commit was to record the status quo so that we know
to route reads of such special refs consistently. Eventually, the list
should be reduced to its bare minimum of refs which really are special,
namely FETCH_HEAD and MERGE_HEAD.
Follow up on this promise and convert the AUTO_MERGE ref to become a
normal pseudo-ref by using the refs API to both read and write it
instead of accessing the filesystem directly.
Signed-off-by: Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
"git status" is taught to show both the branch being bisected and
being rebased when both are in effect at the same time.
* rj/status-bisect-while-rebase:
status: fix branch shown when not only bisecting
In 83c750acde (wt-status.*: better advice for git status added,
2012-06-05), git-status received new informative messages to describe
the ongoing work in a worktree.
These messages were enhanced in 0722c805d6 (status: show the branch name
if possible in in-progress info, 2013-02-03), to show, if possible, the
branch where the operation was initiated.
Since then, we show incorrect information when several operations are in
progress and one of them is bisect:
$ git checkout -b foo
$ GIT_SEQUENCE_EDITOR='echo break >' git rebase -i HEAD~
$ git checkout -b bar
$ git bisect start
$ git status
...
You are currently editing a commit while rebasing branch 'bar' on '...'.
You are currently bisecting, started from branch 'bar'.
...
Note that we erroneously say "while rebasing branch 'bar'" when we
should be referring to "foo".
This must have gone unnoticed for so long because it must be unusual to
start a bisection while another operation is in progress. And even less
usual to involve different branches.
It caught my attention reviewing a leak introduced in 8b87cfd000
(wt-status: move strbuf into read_and_strip_branch(), 2013-03-16).
A simple change to deal with this situation can be to record in struct
wt_status_state, the branch where the bisect starts separately from the
branch related to other operations.
Let's do it and so we'll be able to display correct information and
we'll avoid the leak as well.
Signed-off-by: Rubén Justo <rjusto@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Let's update the error message we show when the user tries to check out
a branch which is being used in another worktree, following the
guideline reasoned in 4970bedef2 (branch: update the message to refuse
touching a branch in-use, 2023-07-21).
Signed-off-by: Rubén Justo <rjusto@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The "git branch -f" command can refuse to force-update a branch that
is used by another worktree. The original rationale for this
behaviour was that updating a branch that is checked out in another
worktree, without making a matching change to the index and the
working tree files in that worktree, will lead to a very confused
user. "git diff HEAD" will no longer give a useful patch, because
HEAD is a commit unrelated to what the index and the working tree in
the worktree were based on, for example.
These days, the same mechanism also protects branches that are being
rebased or bisected, and the same machanism is expected to be the
right place to add more checks, when we decide to protect branches
undergoing other kinds of operations. We however forgot to rethink
the messaging, which originally said that we are refusing to touch
the branch because it is "checked out" elsewhere, when d2ba271a
(branch: check for bisects and rebases, 2022-06-14) started to
protect branches that are being rebased or bisected.
The spirit of the check has always been that we do not want to
disrupt the use of the same branch in other worktrees. Let's reword
the message slightly to say that the branch is "used by" another
worktree, instead of "checked out".
We could teach the branch.c:prepare_checked_out_branches() function
to remember why it decided that a particular branch needs protecting
(i.e. was it because it was checked out? being bisected? something
else?) in addition to which worktree the branch was in use, and use
that in the error message to say "you cannot force update this
branch because it is being bisected in the worktree X", etc., but it
is dubious that such extra complexity is worth it. The message
already tells which directory the worktree in question is, and it
should be just a "chdir" away for the user to find out what state it
is in, if the user felt curious enough. So let's not go there yet.
Helped-by: Josh Sref <jsoref@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Header files cleanup.
* en/header-split-cache-h-part-3: (28 commits)
fsmonitor-ll.h: split this header out of fsmonitor.h
hash-ll, hashmap: move oidhash() to hash-ll
object-store-ll.h: split this header out of object-store.h
khash: name the structs that khash declares
merge-ll: rename from ll-merge
git-compat-util.h: remove unneccessary include of wildmatch.h
builtin.h: remove unneccessary includes
list-objects-filter-options.h: remove unneccessary include
diff.h: remove unnecessary include of oidset.h
repository: remove unnecessary include of path.h
log-tree: replace include of revision.h with simple forward declaration
cache.h: remove this no-longer-used header
read-cache*.h: move declarations for read-cache.c functions from cache.h
repository.h: move declaration of the_index from cache.h
merge.h: move declarations for merge.c from cache.h
diff.h: move declaration for global in diff.c from cache.h
preload-index.h: move declarations for preload-index.c from elsewhere
sparse-index.h: move declarations for sparse-index.c from cache.h
name-hash.h: move declarations for name-hash.c from cache.h
run-command.h: move declarations for run-command.c from cache.h
...
This also made it clear that several .c files that depended upon path.h
were missing a #include for it; add the missing includes while at it.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
In bdaf1dfae7 (branch: new autosetupmerge option "simple" for matching
branches, 2022-04-29) a new exit for setup_tracking() missed the
clean-up, producing a leak.
$ git config branch.autoSetupMerge simple
$ git remote add local .
$ git update-ref refs/remotes/local/foo HEAD
$ git branch bar local/foo
Direct leak of 384 byte(s) in 1 object(s) allocated from:
... in xrealloc wrapper.c
... in string_list_append_nodup string-list.c
... in find_tracked_branch branch.c
... in for_each_remote remote.c
... in setup_tracking branch.c
... in create_branch branch.c
... in cmd_branch builtinbranch.c
... in run_builtin git.c
Indirect leak of 24 byte(s) in 1 object(s) allocated from:
... in xrealloc wrapper.c
... in strbuf_grow strbuf.c
... in strbuf_add strbuf.c
... in match_name_with_pattern remote.c
... in query_refspecs remote.c
... in remote_find_tracking remote.c
... in find_tracked_branch branch.c
... in for_each_remote remote.c
... in setup_tracking branch.c
... in create_branch branch.c
... in cmd_branch builtinbranch.c
... in run_builtin git.c
The return introduced in bdaf1dfae7 was to avoid setting up the
tracking, but even in that case it is still necessary to do the
clean-up. Let's do it.
Signed-off-by: Rubén Justo <rjusto@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The commit d3115660b4 (branch: add flags and config to inherit tracking,
2021-12-20) replaced in "struct tracking", the member "char *src" by a
new "struct string_list *srcs".
This caused a modification in find_tracked_branch(). The string
returned by remote_find_tracking(), previously assigned to "src", is now
added to the string_list "srcs".
That string_list is initialized with STRING_LIST_INIT_DUP, which means
that what is added is not the given string, but a duplicate. Therefore,
the string returned by remote_find_tracking() is leaked.
The leak can be reviewed with:
$ git branch foo
$ git remote add local .
$ git fetch local
$ git branch --track bar local/foo
Direct leak of 24 byte(s) in 1 object(s) allocated from:
... in xrealloc wrapper.c
... in strbuf_grow strbuf.c
... in strbuf_add strbuf.c
... in match_name_with_pattern remote.c
... in query_refspecs remote.c
... in remote_find_tracking remote.c
... in find_tracked_branch branch.c
... in for_each_remote remote.c
... in setup_tracking branch.c
... in create_branch branch.c
... in cmd_branch builtin/branch.c
... in run_builtin git.c
Let's fix the leak, using the "_nodup" API to add to the string_list.
This way, the string itself will be added instead of being strdup()'d.
And when the string_list is cleared, the string will be freed.
Signed-off-by: Rubén Justo <rjusto@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Let's fix a leak we have in check_tracking_branch() since the function
was introduced in 41c21f22d0 (branch.c: Validate tracking branches with
refspecs instead of refs/remotes/*, 2013-04-21).
The leak can be reviewed with:
$ git remote add local .
$ git update-ref refs/remotes/local/foo HEAD
$ git branch --track bar local/foo
Direct leak of 24 byte(s) in 1 object(s) allocated from:
... in xrealloc wrapper.c
... in strbuf_grow strbuf.c
... in strbuf_add strbuf.c
... in match_name_with_pattern remote.c
... in query_refspecs remote.c
... in remote_find_tracking remote.c
... in check_tracking_branch branch.c
... in for_each_remote remote.c
... in validate_remote_tracking_branch branch.c
... in dwim_branch_start branch.c
... in create_branch branch.c
... in cmd_branch builtin/branch.c
... in run_builtin git.c
Signed-off-by: Rubén Justo <rjusto@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
In d3115660b4 (branch: add flags and config to inherit tracking,
2021-12-20) a new option was introduced to allow creating a new branch,
inheriting the tracking of another branch.
The new code, strdup()'d the remote_name of the existing branch, but
unfortunately it was not freed, producing a leak.
$ git remote add local .
$ git update-ref refs/remotes/local/foo HEAD
$ git branch --track bar local/foo
branch 'bar' set up to track 'local/foo'.
$ git branch --track=inherit baz bar
branch 'baz' set up to track 'local/foo'.
Direct leak of 6 byte(s) in 1 object(s) allocated from:
... in xstrdup wrapper.c
... in inherit_tracking branch.c
... in setup_tracking branch.c
... in create_branch branch.c
... in cmd_branch builtin/branch.c
... in run_builtin git.c
Actually, the string we're strdup()'ing is from the struct branch
returned by get_branch(). Which, in turn, retrieves the string from the
global "struct repository". This makes perfectly valid to use the
string throughout the entire execution of create_branch(). There is no
need to duplicate it.
Let's fix the leak, removing the strdup().
Signed-off-by: Rubén Justo <rjusto@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
In e89f151db1 (branch: move --set-upstream-to behavior to
dwim_and_setup_tracking(), 2022-01-28) the string returned by
dwim_branch_start() was not freed, resulting in a memory leak.
It can be reviewed with:
$ git remote add local .
$ git update-ref refs/remotes/local/foo HEAD
$ git branch --set-upstream-to local/foo foo
Direct leak of 23 byte(s) in 1 object(s) allocated from:
... in xstrdup wrapper.c
... in expand_ref refs.c
... in repo_dwim_ref refs.c
... in dwim_branch_start branch.c
... in dwim_and_setup_tracking branch.c
... in cmd_branch builtin/branch.c
... in run_builtin git.c
Let's free it now.
Signed-off-by: Rubén Justo <rjusto@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Error messages given when working on an unborn branch that is
checked out in another worktree have been improved.
* rj/branch-unborn-in-other-worktrees:
branch: avoid unnecessary worktrees traversals
branch: rename orphan branches in any worktree
branch: description for orphan branch errors
branch: use get_worktrees() in copy_or_rename_branch()
branch: test for failures while renaming branches
hash.h depends upon and includes repository.h, due to the definition and
use of the_hash_algo (defined as the_repository->hash_algo). However,
most headers trying to include hash.h are only interested in the layout
of the structs like object_id. Move the parts of hash.h that do not
depend upon repository.h into a new file hash-ll.h (the "low level"
parts of hash.h), and adjust other files to use this new header where
the convenience inline functions aren't needed.
This allows hash.h and object.h to be fairly small, minimal headers. It
also exposes a lot of hidden dependencies on both path.h (which was
brought in by repository.h) and repository.h (which was previously
implicitly brought in by object.h), so also adjust other files to be
more explicit about what they depend upon.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Dozens of files made use of advice functions, without explicitly
including advice.h. This made it more difficult to find which files
could remove a dependence on cache.h. Make C files explicitly include
advice.h if they are using it.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Calvin Wan <calvinwan@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
* ab/remove-implicit-use-of-the-repository:
libs: use "struct repository *" argument, not "the_repository"
post-cocci: adjust comments for recent repo_* migration
cocci: apply the "revision.h" part of "the_repository.pending"
cocci: apply the "rerere.h" part of "the_repository.pending"
cocci: apply the "refs.h" part of "the_repository.pending"
cocci: apply the "promisor-remote.h" part of "the_repository.pending"
cocci: apply the "packfile.h" part of "the_repository.pending"
cocci: apply the "pretty.h" part of "the_repository.pending"
cocci: apply the "object-store.h" part of "the_repository.pending"
cocci: apply the "diff.h" part of "the_repository.pending"
cocci: apply the "commit.h" part of "the_repository.pending"
cocci: apply the "commit-reach.h" part of "the_repository.pending"
cocci: apply the "cache.h" part of "the_repository.pending"
cocci: add missing "the_repository" macros to "pending"
cocci: sort "the_repository" rules by header
cocci: fix incorrect & verbose "the_repository" rules
cocci: remove dead rule from "the_repository.pending.cocci"
As can easily be seen from grepping in our sources, we had these uses
of "the_repository" in various library code in cases where the
function in question was already getting a "struct repository *"
argument. Let's use that argument instead.
Out of these changes only the changes to "cache-tree.c",
"commit-reach.c", "shallow.c" and "upload-pack.c" would have cleanly
applied before the migration away from the "repo_*()" wrapper macros
in the preceding commits.
The rest aren't new, as we'd previously implicitly refer to
"the_repository", but it's now more obvious that we were doing the
wrong thing all along, and should have used the parameter instead.
The change to change "get_index_format_default(the_repository)" in
"read-cache.c" to use the "r" variable instead should arguably have
been part of [1], or in the subsequent cleanup in [2]. Let's do it
here, as can be seen from the initial code in [3] it's not important
that we use "the_repository" there, but would prefer to always use the
current repository.
This change excludes the "the_repository" use in "upload-pack.c"'s
upload_pack_advertise(), as the in-flight [4] makes that change.
1. ee1f0c242e (read-cache: add index.skipHash config option,
2023-01-06)
2. 6269f8eaad (treewide: always have a valid "index_state.repo"
member, 2023-01-17)
3. 7211b9e753 (repo-settings: consolidate some config settings,
2019-08-13)
4. <Y/hbUsGPVNAxTdmS@coredump.intra.peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Apply the part of "the_repository.pending.cocci" pertaining to
"refs.h".
Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Apply the part of "the_repository.pending.cocci" pertaining to
"cache.h".
Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
When we introduced replace_each_worktree_head_symref() in 70999e9cec
(branch -m: update all per-worktree HEADs, 2016-03-27), we implemented a
best effort approach.
If we are asked to rename a branch that is simultaneously checked out in
multiple worktrees, we try to update all of those worktrees. If we fail
updating any of them, we die() as a signal that something has gone
wrong. However, at this point, the branch ref has already been renamed
and also updated the HEADs of the successfully updated worktrees.
Despite returning an error, we do not try to rollback those changes.
Let's add a test to notice if we change this behavior in the future.
In next commits we will change replace_each_worktree_head_symref() to
work more closely with its only caller, copy_or_rename_branch(). Let's
move the former closer to its caller, to facilitate those changes.
Signed-off-by: Rubén Justo <rjusto@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Dozens of files made use of gettext functions, without explicitly
including gettext.h. This made it more difficult to find which files
could remove a dependence on cache.h. Make C files explicitly include
gettext.h if they are using it.
However, while compat/fsmonitor/fsm-ipc-darwin.c should also gain an
include of gettext.h, it was left out to avoid conflicting with an
in-flight topic.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
A few subcommands have been taught to stop users from working on a
branch that is being used in another worktree linked to the same
repository.
* rj/avoid-switching-to-already-used-branch:
switch: reject if the branch is already checked out elsewhere (test)
rebase: refuse to switch to a branch already checked out elsewhere (test)
branch: fix die_if_checked_out() when ignore_current_worktree
worktree: introduce is_shared_symref()
In 8d9fdd7 (worktree.c: check whether branch is rebased in another
worktree, 2016-04-22) die_if_checked_out() learned a new option
ignore_current_worktree, to modify the operation from "die() if the
branch is checked out in any worktree" to "die() if the branch is
checked out in any worktree other than the current one".
Unfortunately we implemented it by checking the flag is_current in the
worktree that find_shared_symref() returns.
When the same branch is checked out in several worktrees simultaneously,
find_shared_symref() will return the first matching worktree in the list
composed by get_worktrees(). If one of the worktrees with the checked
out branch is the current worktree, find_shared_symref() may or may not
return it, depending on the order in the list.
Instead of find_shared_symref(), let's do the search using use the
recently introduced API is_shared_symref(), and consider
ignore_current_worktree when necessary.
Signed-off-by: Rubén Justo <rjusto@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
'git branch --recurse-submodules start from-here' fails if any submodule
present in 'from-here' is not yet cloned (under
submodule.propagateBranches=true). We then give this advice:
"You may try updating the submodules using 'git checkout from-here && git submodule update --init'"
If 'submodule.recurse' is set, 'git checkout from-here' will also fail since
it will try to recursively checkout the submodules.
Improve the advice by adding '--no-recurse-submodules' to the checkout
command.
Signed-off-by: Philippe Blain <levraiphilippeblain@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Glen Choo <chooglen@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The branch_checked_out() helper helps commands like 'git branch' and
'git fetch' from overwriting refs that are currently checked out in
other worktrees.
A future update to 'git rebase' will introduce a new '--update-refs'
option which will update the local refs that point to commits that are
being rebased. To avoid collisions as the rebase completes, we want to
make the future data store for these refs to be considered by
branch_checked_out().
The data store is a plaintext file inside the 'rebase-merge' directory
for that worktree. The file lists refnames followed by two OIDs, each on
separate lines. The OIDs will be used to store the original values of
the refs and the to-be-written values as the rebase progresses, but can
be ignored at the moment.
Create a new sequencer_get_update_refs_state() method that parses this
file and populates a struct string_list with the ref-OID pairs. We can
then use this list to add to the current_checked_out_branches strmap
used by branch_checked_out().
To properly navigate to the rebase directory for a given worktree,
extract the static strbuf_worktree_gitdir() method to a public API
method.
We can test that this works without having Git write this file by
artificially creating one in our test script, at least until 'git rebase
--update-refs' is implemented and we can use it directly.
Signed-off-by: Derrick Stolee <derrickstolee@github.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
* ds/branch-checked-out:
branch: drop unused worktrees variable
fetch: stop passing around unused worktrees variable
branch: fix branch_checked_out() leaks
branch: use branch_checked_out() when deleting refs
fetch: use new branch_checked_out() and add tests
branch: check for bisects and rebases
branch: add branch_checked_out() helper
The branch_checked_out() method populates a strmap linking a refname to
a worktree that has that branch checked out. While unlikely, it is
possible that a bug or filesystem manipulation could create a scenario
where the same ref is checked out in multiple places. Further, there are
some states in an interactive rebase where HEAD and REBASE_HEAD point to
the same ref, leading to multiple insertions into the strmap. In either
case, the strmap_put() method returns the old value which is leaked.
Update branch_checked_out() to consume that pointer and free it.
Add a test in t2407 that checks this erroneous case. The test "checks
itself" by first confirming that the filesystem manipulations it makes
trigger the branch_checked_out() logic, and then sets up similar
manipulations to make it look like there are multiple worktrees pointing
to the same ref.
While TEST_PASSES_SANITIZE_LEAK would be helpful to demonstrate the
leakage and prevent it in the future, t2407 uses helpers such as 'git
clone' that cause the test to fail under that mode.
Signed-off-by: Derrick Stolee <derrickstolee@github.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The branch_checked_out() helper was added by the previous change, but it
used an over-simplified view to check if a branch is checked out. It
only focused on the HEAD symref, but ignored whether a bisect or rebase
was happening.
Teach branch_checked_out() to check for these things, and also add tests
to ensure that we do not lose this functionality in the future.
Now that this test coverage exists, we can safely refactor
validate_new_branchname() to use branch_checked_out().
Note that we need to prepend "refs/heads/" to the 'state.branch' after
calling wt_status_check_*(). We also need to duplicate wt->path so the
value is not freed at the end of the call.
Signed-off-by: Derrick Stolee <derrickstolee@github.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The validate_new_branchname() method contains a check to see if a branch
is checked out in any non-bare worktree. This is intended to prevent a
force push that will mess up an existing checkout. This helper is not
suitable to performing just that check, because the method will die()
when the branch is checked out instead of returning an error code.
Create a new branch_checked_out() helper that performs the most basic
form of this check. To ensure we can call branch_checked_out() in a loop
with good performance, do a single preparation step that iterates over
all worktrees and stores their current HEAD branches in a strmap. The
branch_checked_out() helper can then discover these branches using a
hash lookup.
This helper is currently missing some key functionality. Namely: it
doesn't look for active rebases or bisects which mean that the branch is
"checked out" even though HEAD doesn't point to that ref. This
functionality will be added in a coming change.
We could use branch_checked_out() in validate_new_branchname(), but this
missing functionality would be a regression. However, we have no tests
that cover this case!
Add a new test script that will be expanded with these cross-worktree
ref updates. The current tests would still pass if we refactored
validate_new_branchname() to use this version of branch_checked_out().
The next change will fix that functionality and add the proper test
coverage.
Signed-off-by: Derrick Stolee <derrickstolee@github.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Rename .env_array member to .env in the child_process structure.
* ab/env-array:
run-command API users: use "env" not "env_array" in comments & names
run-command API: rename "env_array" to "env"
Start following-up on the rename mentioned in c7c4bdeccf (run-command
API: remove "env" member, always use "env_array", 2021-11-25) of
"env_array" to "env".
The "env_array" name was picked in 19a583dc39 (run-command: add
env_array, an optional argv_array for env, 2014-10-19) because "env"
was taken. Let's not forever keep the oddity of "*_array" for this
"struct strvec", but not for its "args" sibling.
This commit is almost entirely made with a coccinelle rule[1]. The
only manual change here is in run-command.h to rename the struct
member itself and to change "env_array" to "env" in the
CHILD_PROCESS_INIT initializer.
The rest of this is all a result of applying [1]:
* make contrib/coccinelle/run_command.cocci.patch
* patch -p1 <contrib/coccinelle/run_command.cocci.patch
* git add -u
1. cat contrib/coccinelle/run_command.pending.cocci
@@
struct child_process E;
@@
- E.env_array
+ E.env
@@
struct child_process *E;
@@
- E->env_array
+ E->env
I've avoided changing any comments and derived variable names here,
that will all be done in the next commit.
Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
"git -c branch.autosetupmerge=simple branch $A $B" will set the $B
as $A's upstream only when $A and $B shares the same name, and "git
-c push.default=simple" on branch $A would push to update the
branch $A at the remote $B came from. Also more places use the
sole remote, if exists, before defaulting to 'origin'.
* tk/simple-autosetupmerge:
push: new config option "push.autoSetupRemote" supports "simple" push
push: default to single remote even when not named origin
branch: new autosetupmerge option 'simple' for matching branches
With the default push.default option, "simple", beginners are
protected from accidentally pushing to the "wrong" branch in
centralized workflows: if the remote tracking branch they would push
to does not have the same name as the local branch, and they try to do
a "default push", they get an error and explanation with options.
There is a particular centralized workflow where this often happens:
a user branches to a new local topic branch from an existing
remote branch, eg with "checkout -b feature1 origin/master". With
the default branch.autosetupmerge configuration (value "true"), git
will automatically add origin/master as the upstream tracking branch.
When the user pushes with a default "git push", with the intention of
pushing their (new) topic branch to the remote, they get an error, and
(amongst other things) a suggestion to run "git push origin HEAD".
If they follow this suggestion the push succeeds, but on subsequent
default pushes they continue to get an error - so eventually they
figure out to add "-u" to change the tracking branch, or they spelunk
the push.default config doc as proposed and set it to "current", or
some GUI tooling does one or the other of these things for them.
When one of their coworkers later works on the same topic branch,
they don't get any of that "weirdness". They just "git checkout
feature1" and everything works exactly as they expect, with the shared
remote branch set up as remote tracking branch, and push and pull
working out of the box.
The "stable state" for this way of working is that local branches have
the same-name remote tracking branch (origin/feature1 in this
example), and multiple people can work on that remote feature branch
at the same time, trusting "git pull" to merge or rebase as required
for them to be able to push their interim changes to that same feature
branch on that same remote.
(merging from the upstream "master" branch, and merging back to it,
are separate more involved processes in this flow).
There is a problem in this flow/way of working, however, which is that
the first user, when they first branched from origin/master, ended up
with the "wrong" remote tracking branch (different from the stable
state). For a while, before they pushed (and maybe longer, if they
don't use -u/--set-upstream), their "git pull" wasn't getting other
users' changes to the feature branch - it was getting any changes from
the remote "master" branch instead (a completely different class of
changes!)
An experienced git user might say "well yeah, that's what it means to
have the remote tracking branch set to origin/master!" - but the
original user above didn't *ask* to have the remote master branch
added as remote tracking branch - that just happened automatically
when they branched their feature branch. They didn't necessarily even
notice or understand the meaning of the "set up to track 'origin/master'"
message when they created the branch - especially if they are using a
GUI.
Looking at how to fix this, you might think "OK, so disable auto setup
of remote tracking - set branch.autosetupmerge to false" - but that
will inconvenience the *second* user in this story - the one who just
wanted to start working on the topic branch. The first and second
users swap roles at different points in time of course - they should
both have a sane configuration that does the right thing in both
situations.
Make this "branches have the same name locally as on the remote"
workflow less painful / more obvious by introducing a new
branch.autosetupmerge option called "simple", to match the same-name
"push.default" option that makes similar assumptions.
This new option automatically sets up tracking in a *subset* of the
current default situations: when the original ref is a remote tracking
branch *and* has the same branch name on the remote (as the new local
branch name).
Update the error displayed when the 'push.default=simple' configuration
rejects a mismatching-upstream-name default push, to offer this new
branch.autosetupmerge option that will prevent this class of error.
With this new configuration, in the example situation above, the first
user does *not* get origin/master set up as the tracking branch for
the new local branch. If they "git pull" in their new local-only
branch, they get an error explaining there is no upstream branch -
which makes sense and is helpful. If they "git push", they get an
error explaining how to push *and* suggesting they specify
--set-upstream - which is exactly the right thing to do for them.
This new option is likely not appropriate for users intentionally
implementing a "triangular workflow" with a shared upstream tracking
branch, that they "git pull" in and a "private" feature branch that
they push/force-push to just for remote safe-keeping until they are
ready to push up to the shared branch explicitly/separately. Such
users are likely to prefer keeping the current default
merge.autosetupmerge=true behavior, and change their push.default to
"current".
Also extend the existing branch tests with three new cases testing
this option - the obvious matching-name and non-matching-name cases,
and also a non-matching-ref-type case. The matching-name case needs to
temporarily create an independent repo to fetch from, as the general
strategy of using the local repo as the remote in these tests
precludes locally branching with the same name as in the "remote".
Signed-off-by: Tao Klerks <tao@klerks.biz>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Give hint when branch tracking cannot be established because fetch
refspecs from multiple remote repositories overlap.
* tk/ambiguous-fetch-refspec:
tracking branches: add advice to ambiguous refspec error
A handful of obvious clean-ups around a topic that is already in
'master'.
* gc/branch-recurse-submodules-fix:
branch.c: simplify advice-and-die sequence
branch: rework comments for future developers
branch: remove negative exit code
branch --set-upstream-to: be consistent when advising
branch: give submodule updating advice before exit
branch: support more tracking modes when recursing
The error "not tracking: ambiguous information for ref" is raised
when we are evaluating what tracking information to set on a branch,
and find that the ref to be added as tracking branch is mapped
under multiple remotes' fetch refspecs.
This can easily happen when a user copy-pastes a remote definition
in their git config, and forgets to change the tracking path.
Add advice in this situation, explicitly highlighting which remotes
are involved and suggesting how to correct the situation. Also
update a test to explicitly expect that advice.
Signed-off-by: Tao Klerks <tao@klerks.biz>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
In the dwim_branch_start(), when we cannot find an appropriate
upstream, we will die with the same message anyway, whether we
issue an advice message.
Flip the code around a bit and simplify the flow using
advise_if_enabled() function.
Helped-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Glen Choo <chooglen@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
For two cases in which we do not explicitly pass --track=<choice>
option down to the submodule--helper subprocess, we have comments
that say "we do not have to pass --track", but in fact we not just
do not have to, but it would be incorrect to pass any --track option
to the subprocess (instead, the correct behaviour is to let the
subprocess figure out what is the appropriate tracking mode to use).
Signed-off-by: Glen Choo <chooglen@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
