The `--preserve-merges` mode of the `rebase` command is slated to be
deprecated soon, as the more powerful `--rebase-merges` mode is
available now, and the latter was designed with the express intent to
address the shortcomings of `--preserve-merges`' design (e.g. the
inability to reorder commits in an interactive rebase).
As such, we will eventually even remove the `--preserve-merges` support,
and along with it, its tests.
In preparation for this, and also to allow the Windows phase of our
automated tests to save some well-needed time when running the test
suite, this commit introduces a new prerequisite REBASE_P, which can be
forced to being unmet by setting the environment variable
`GIT_TEST_SKIP_REBASE_P` to any non-empty string.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
"git pull --rebase=interactive" learned "i" as a short-hand for
"interactive".
* js/pull-rebase-type-shorthand:
pull --rebase=<type>: allow single-letter abbreviations for the type
Git for Windows' original 4aa8b8c828 (Teach 'git pull' to handle
--rebase=interactive, 2011-10-21) had support for the very convenient
abbreviation
git pull --rebase=i
which was later lost when it was ported to the builtin `git pull`, and
it was not introduced before the patch eventually made it into Git as
f5eb87b98d (pull: allow interactive rebase with --rebase=interactive,
2016-01-13).
However, it is *really* a useful short hand for the occasional rebasing
pull on branches that do not usually want to be rebased.
So let's reintroduce this convenience, at long last.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
If has_uncommitted_changes() can't resolve HEAD (e.g.,
because it's unborn or corrupt), then we end up calling
run_diff_index() with an empty revs.pending array. This
causes a segfault, as run_diff_index() blindly looks at the
first pending item.
Fixing this raises a question of fault: should
run_diff_index() handle this case, or is the caller wrong to
pass an empty pending list?
Looking at the other callers of run_diff_index(), they
handle this in one of three ways:
- they resolve the object themselves, and avoid doing the
diff if it's not valid
- they resolve the object themselves, and fall back to the
empty tree
- they use setup_revisions(), which will die() if the
object isn't valid
Since this is the only broken caller, that argues that the
fix should go there. Falling back to the empty tree makes
sense here, as we'd claim uncommitted changes if and only if
the index is non-empty. This may be a little funny in the
case of corruption (the corrupt HEAD probably _isn't_
empty), but:
- we don't actually know the reason here that HEAD didn't
resolve (the much more likely case is that we have an
unborn HEAD, in which case the empty tree comparison is
the right thing)
- this matches how other code, like "git diff", behaves
While we're thinking about it, let's add an assertion to
run_diff_index(). It should always be passed a single
object, and as this bug shows, it's easy to get it wrong
(and an assertion is easier to hunt down than a segfault, or
a quietly ignored extra tree).
Reported-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The git UI can be improved by addressing the error messages to those
they help: inexperienced and casual git users. To this intent, it is
helpful to make sure the terms used in those messages can be understood
by this segment of users, and that they guide them to resolve the
problem.
In particular, failure to apply a patch during a git rebase is a common
problem that can be very destabilizing for the inexperienced user. It is
important to lead them toward the resolution of the conflict (which is a
3-steps process, thus complex) and reassure them that they can escape a
situation they can't handle with "--abort". This commit answer those two
points by detailling the resolution process and by avoiding cryptic git
linguo.
Signed-off-by: William Duclot <william.duclot@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
When `git pull --rebase --autostash` in a dirty repository resulted in a
fast-forward, nothing was being autostashed and the pull failed. This
was due to a shortcut to avoid running rebase when we can fast-forward,
but autostash is ignored on that codepath.
Now we will only take the shortcut if autostash is not in effect.
Based on a few tests against the git.git repo, the shortcut does not
seem to give us significant performance benefits, on Linux at least.
Regardless, it is more important to be correct than to be fast.
Signed-off-by: Tyler Brazier <tyler@tylerbrazier.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
"git pull --rebase", when there is no new commits on our side since
we forked from the upstream, should be able to fast-forward without
invoking "git rebase", but it didn't.
* jc/pull-rebase-ff:
pull: fast-forward "pull --rebase=true"
"git pull --rebase" always runs "git rebase" after fetching the
commit to serve as the new base, even when the new base is a
descendant of the current HEAD, i.e. we haven't done any work.
In such a case, we can instead fast-forward to the new base without
invoking the rebase process.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Use test_i18ngrep function instead of grep for grepping strings.
Signed-off-by: Vasco Almeida <vascomalmeida@sapo.pt>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
It was noticed by Brendan Forster last October that the builtin `git am`
regressed on that. Our hot fix reverted to spawning the recursive merge
instead of using it as a library function.
As we are about to revert that hot fix, after making the recursive merge a
true library function (i.e. a function that does not die() in case of
"normal" errors), let's add a test that verifies that we do not regress on
the same problem which made the hot fix necessary in the first place.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
More markings of messages for i18n, with updates to various tests
to pass GETTEXT_POISON tests.
One patch from the original submission dropped due to conflicts
with jk/upload-pack-hook, which is still in flux.
* va/i18n-even-more: (38 commits)
t5541: become resilient to GETTEXT_POISON
i18n: branch: mark comment when editing branch description for translation
i18n: unmark die messages for translation
i18n: submodule: escape shell variables inside eval_gettext
i18n: submodule: join strings marked for translation
i18n: init-db: join message pieces
i18n: remote: allow translations to reorder message
i18n: remote: mark URL fallback text for translation
i18n: standardise messages
i18n: sequencer: add period to error message
i18n: merge: change command option help to lowercase
i18n: merge: mark messages for translation
i18n: notes: mark options for translation
i18n: notes: mark strings for translation
i18n: transport-helper.c: change N_() call to _()
i18n: bisect: mark strings for translation
t5523: use test_i18ngrep for negation
t4153: fix negated test_i18ngrep call
t9003: become resilient to GETTEXT_POISON
tests: unpack-trees: update to use test_i18n* functions
...
Mark message for translation telling the user she has conflicts to
resolve. Expose each particular use case, in order to enable translating
entire sentences which would facilitate translating into other
languages.
Change "Pull" to lowercase to match other instances. Update test
t5520-pull.sh, that relied on the old error message, to use the new one.
Although we loose in source code conciseness, we would gain better
translations because translators can 1) translate the entire sentence,
including those terms concerning Git (committing, merging, etc) 2) have
leeway to adapt to their languages.
Signed-off-by: Vasco Almeida <vascomalmeida@sapo.pt>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
git-pull silently ignores the --verify-signatures option when
running --rebase, potentially leaving users in the belief that
the rebase operation would check for valid GPG signatures.
Implementing --verify-signatures for git-rebase was talked about,
but doubts for a valid workflow rose up. Since you usually merge
other's branches into your branch you might have an interest that
their side has a valid GPG signature.
Rebasing, on the other hand, is to rebuild your branch on top of
other's work, in order to push the result back, and it is too late
to reject their work even if you find their commits lack acceptable
signature.
Let's warn users that the --verify-signatures option is ignored
during "pull --rebase"; users do not wonder what would happen if
their commits lack acceptable signature that way.
Signed-off-by: Alexander Hirsch <1zeeky@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The "--[no-]autostash" options for git-pull are only valid in
rebase mode (i.e. either --rebase is used or pull.rebase=true).
Existing tests already check the cases when --rebase is used but
fail to check for pull.rebase=true case.
Add two new tests to check that the --[no-]autostash options work
with pull.rebase=true.
Signed-off-by: Mehul Jain <mehul.jain2029@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
These two tests are almost similar and thus can be folded in a for-loop.
Helped-by: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
Signed-off-by: Mehul Jain <mehul.jain2029@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Three tests contains repetitive lines of code.
Factor out common code into test_pull_autostash_fail() and then call it in
these tests.
Helped-by: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
Signed-off-by: Mehul Jain <mehul.jain2029@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Four tests contains repetitive lines of code.
Factor out common code into test_pull_autostash() and then call it in
these tests.
Helped-by: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
Signed-off-by: Mehul Jain <mehul.jain2029@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Checking stderr output using test_i18ncmp may lead to test failure as
some shells write trace output to stderr when run under 'set -x'.
Use test_i18ngrep instead of test_i18ncmp.
Signed-off-by: Mehul Jain <mehul.jain2029@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Test title says that tests are done with rebase.autostash unset,
but does not take any action to make sure that it is indeed unset.
This may lead to test failure if future changes somehow pollutes
the configuration globally.
Ensure consistent test conditions by explicitly unsetting
rebase.autostash.
Signed-off-by: Mehul Jain <mehul.jain2029@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Signed-off-by: Mehul Jain <mehul.jain2029@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
If rebase.autoStash configuration variable is set, there is no way to
override it for "git pull --rebase" from the command line.
Teach "git pull --rebase" the --[no-]autostash command line flag which
overrides the current value of rebase.autoStash, if set. As "git rebase"
understands the --[no-]autostash option, it's just a matter of passing
the option to underlying "git rebase" when "git pull --rebase" is called.
Helped-by: Matthieu Moy <Matthieu.Moy@grenoble-inp.fr>
Helped-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Helped-by: Paul Tan <pyokagan@gmail.com>
Helped-by: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
Signed-off-by: Mehul Jain <mehul.jain2029@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
A couple of years ago, I found the need to collaborate on topic
branches that were rebased all the time, and I really needed to see
what I was rebasing when pulling, so I introduced an
interactively-rebasing pull.
The way builtin pull works, this change also supports the value
'interactive' for the 'branch.<name>.rebase' config variable, which
is a neat thing because users can now configure given branches for
interactively-rebasing pulls without having to type out the complete
`--rebase=interactive` option every time they pull.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
"git pull --rebase" has been taught to pay attention to
rebase.autostash configuration.
* kd/pull-rebase-autostash:
pull: allow dirty tree when rebase.autostash enabled
rebase learned to stash changes when it encounters a dirty work tree,
but git pull --rebase does not.
Only verify if the working tree is dirty when rebase.autostash is not
enabled.
Signed-off-by: Kevin Daudt <me@ikke.info>
Signed-off-by: Paul Tan <pyokagan@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
While parsing the command-line arguments, git-pull stops parsing at the
first unrecognized option, assuming that any subsequent options are for
git-fetch, and can thus be kept in the shell's positional parameters
list, so that it can be passed to git-fetch via the expansion of "$@".
However, certain functions in git-pull assume that the positional
parameters do not contain any options:
* error_on_no_merge_candidates() uses the number of positional
parameters to determine which error message to print out, and will
thus print the wrong message if git-fetch's options are passed in as
well.
* the call to get_remote_merge_branch() assumes that the positional
parameters only contains the optional repo and refspecs, and will
thus silently fail if git-fetch's options are passed in as well.
* --dry-run is a valid git-fetch option, but if provided after any
git-fetch options, it is not recognized by git-pull and thus git-pull
will continue to run the merge or rebase.
Fix these bugs by teaching git-pull to parse git-fetch's options as
well. Add tests to prevent regressions.
This removes the limitation where git-fetch's options have to come after
git-merge's and git-rebase's options on the command line. Update the
documentation to reflect this.
Signed-off-by: Paul Tan <pyokagan@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
When testing a fast-forward merge with git-pull, check to see if the
reflog action is "pull" with the arguments passed to git-pull.
While we are in the vicinity, remove the empty line as well.
Signed-off-by: Paul Tan <pyokagan@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Commit 19a7fcb (allow pull --rebase on branch yet to be born,
2009-08-11) special cases git-pull on an unborn branch in a different
code path such that git-pull --rebase is still valid even though there
is no HEAD yet.
This code path still ensures that there is no index in order not to lose
any staged changes. Implement a test to ensure that this check is
triggered.
Signed-off-by: Paul Tan <pyokagan@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Since rebasing on top of multiple upstream branches does not make sense,
since 51b2ead (disallow providing multiple upstream branches to rebase,
pull --rebase, 2009-02-18), git-pull explicitly disallowed specifying
multiple branches in the rebase case.
Implement tests to ensure that git-pull fails and prints out the
user-friendly error message in such a case.
Signed-off-by: Paul Tan <pyokagan@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Since b10ac50 (Fix pulling into the same branch., 2005-08-25), git-pull,
upon detecting that git-fetch updated the current head, will
fast-forward the working tree to the updated head commit.
Implement tests to ensure that the fast-forward occurs in such a case,
as well as to ensure that the user-friendly advice is printed upon
failure.
Signed-off-by: Paul Tan <pyokagan@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Commit d38a30d (Be more user-friendly when refusing to do something
because of conflict., 2010-01-12) introduced code paths to git-pull
which will error out with user-friendly advices if the user is in the
middle of a merge or has unmerged files.
Implement tests to ensure that git-pull will not run, and will print
these advices, if the user is in the middle of a merge or has unmerged
files in the index.
Signed-off-by: Paul Tan <pyokagan@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
a8c9bef (pull: improve advice for unconfigured error case, 2009-10-05)
fully established the current advices given by git-pull for the
different cases where git-fetch will not have anything marked for merge:
1. We fetched from a specific remote, and a refspec was given, but it
ended up not fetching anything. This is usually because the user
provided a wildcard refspec which had no matches on the remote end.
2. We fetched from a non-default remote, but didn't specify a branch to
merge. We can't use the configured one because it applies to the
default remote, and thus the user must specify the branches to merge.
3. We fetched from the branch's or repo's default remote, but:
a. We are not on a branch, so there will never be a configured branch
to merge with.
b. We are on a branch, but there is no configured branch to merge
with.
4. We fetched from the branch's or repo's default remote, but the
configured branch to merge didn't get fetched (either it doesn't
exist, or wasn't part of the configured fetch refspec)
Implement tests for the above 5 cases to ensure that the correct code
paths are triggered for each of these cases.
Signed-off-by: Paul Tan <pyokagan@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Many tests in t5520 used the following to test the contents of files:
test `cat file` = expected
or
test $(cat file) = expected
These 2 forms, however, will be affected by field splitting and,
depending on the value of $IFS, may be split into multiple arguments,
making the test fail in mysterious ways.
Replace the above 2 forms with:
test "$(cat file)" = expected
as quoting the command substitution will prevent field splitting.
Signed-off-by: Paul Tan <pyokagan@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The code comment for "git merge" in builtin/merge.c, we say
If the merged head is a valid one there is no reason
to forbid "git merge" into a branch yet to be born.
We do the same for "git pull".
and t5520 does have an existing test for that behaviour. However,
there was no test to make sure that 'git pull' to pull multiple
branches into an unborn branch must fail.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Fix style funnies in early part of this test script that checks "git
pull" into an unborn branch. The primary change is that 'chdir' to
a newly created empty test repository is now protected by being done
in a subshell to make it more robust without having to chdir back to
the original place.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
If a user is working on master, and has merged in their feature branch, but now
has to "git pull" because master moved, with pull.rebase their feature branch
will be flattened into master.
This is because "git pull" currently does not know about rebase's preserve
merges flag, which would avoid this behavior, as it would instead replay just
the merge commit of the feature branch onto the new master, and not replay each
individual commit in the feature branch.
Add a --rebase=preserve option, which will pass along --preserve-merges to
rebase.
Also add 'preserve' to the allowed values for the pull.rebase config setting.
Signed-off-by: Stephen Haberman <stephen@exigencecorp.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
"git pull" into nothing trashed "local changes" that were in the
index, and this avoids it.
* jk/pull-into-dirty-unborn:
pull: merge into unborn by fast-forwarding from empty tree
pull: update unborn branch tip after index
The logic for pulling into an unborn branch was originally
designed to be used on a newly-initialized repository
(d09e79c, git-pull: allow pulling into an empty repository,
2006-11-16). It thus did not initially deal with
uncommitted changes in the unborn branch. The case of an
_unstaged_ untracked file was fixed by 4b3ffe5 (pull: do not
clobber untracked files on initial pull, 2011-03-25).
However, it still clobbered existing staged files, both when
the file exists in the merged commit (it will be
overwritten), and when it does not (it will be deleted).
We fix this by doing a two-way merge, where the "current"
side of the merge is an empty tree, and the "target" side is
HEAD (already updated to FETCH_HEAD at this point). This
amounts to claiming that all work in the index was done vs.
an empty tree, and thus all content of the index is
precious.
Note that this use of read-tree just gives us protection
against overwriting index and working tree changes. It will
not actually result in a 3-way merge conflict in the index.
This is fine, as this is a rare situation, and the conflict
would not be interesting anyway (it must, by definition, be
an add/add conflict with the whole content conflicting). And
it makes it simpler for the user to recover, as they have no
HEAD to "git reset" back to.
Reported-by: Stefan Schüßler <mail@stefanschuessler.de>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Rast <trast@inf.ethz.ch>
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Configuration from test_config does not last beyond the end of the
current test assertion, making each test easier to think about in
isolation.
Signed-off-by: Ramkumar Ramachandra <artagnon@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Instead of using construct such as:
test_when_finished "git config --unset <key>"
git config <key> <value>
uses
test_config <key> <value>
The latter takes care of removing <key> at the end of the test.
Signed-off-by: Yann Droneaud <ydroneaud@opteya.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Currently we either need to set branch.<name>.rebase for existing
branches if we'd like "git pull" to mean "git pull --rebase", or have
the forethought of setting "branch.autosetuprebase" before we create
the branch.
Introduce a "pull.rebase" option to globally configure "git pull" to
mean "git pull --rebase" for any branch.
This option will be considered at a lower priority than
branch.<name>.rebase, i.e. we could set pull.rebase=true and
branch.<name>.rebase=false and the latter configuration option would
win.
Reviewed-by: Sverre Rabbelier <srabbelier@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Fernando Vezzosi <buccia@repnz.net>
Reviewed-by: Eric Herman <eric@freesa.org>
Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
Liked-by: Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
For a pull into an unborn branch, we do not use "git merge"
at all. Instead, we call read-tree directly. However, we
used the --reset parameter instead of "-m", which turns off
the safety features.
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Since c85c792 (pull --rebase: be cleverer with rebased upstream
branches, 2008-01-26), "git pull --rebase" has used the reflog to try to
rebase from the old upstream onto the new upstream.
Make this work if the local repository is explicitly passed on the
command line as in 'git pull --rebase . foo'.
Signed-off-by: Martin von Zweigbergk <martin.von.zweigbergk@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Santi Béjar <santi@agolina.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Prior to c85c792 (pull --rebase: be cleverer with rebased upstream
branches, 2008-01-26), pull --rebase would run
git rebase $merge_head
which resulted in a call to
git format-patch ... --ignore-if-in-upstream $merge_head..$cur_branch
This resulted in patches from $merge_head..$cur_branch being applied, as
long as they did not already exist in $cur_branch..$merge_head.
Unfortunately, when upstream is rebased, $merge_head..$cur_branch also
refers to "old" commits that have already been rebased upstream, meaning
that many patches that were already fixed upstream would be reapplied.
This could result in many spurious conflicts, as well as reintroduce
patches that were intentionally dropped upstream.
So the algorithm was changed in c85c792 (pull --rebase: be cleverer with
rebased upstream branches, 2008-01-26) and d44e712 (pull: support rebased
upstream + fetch + pull --rebase, 2009-07-19). Defining $old_remote_ref to
be the most recent entry in the reflog for @{upstream} that is an ancestor
of $cur_branch, pull --rebase was changed to run
git rebase --onto $merge_head $old_remote_ref
which results in a call to
git format-patch ... --ignore-if-in-upstream $old_remote_ref..$cur_branch
The whole point of this change was to reduce the number of commits being
reapplied, by avoiding commits that upstream already has or had.
In the rebased upstream case, this change achieved that purpose. It is
worth noting, though, that since $old_remote_ref is always an ancestor of
$cur_branch (by its definition), format-patch will not know what upstream
is and thus will not be able to determine if any patches are already
upstream; they will all be reapplied.
In the non-rebased upstream case, this new form is usually the same as the
original code but in some cases $old_remote_ref can be an ancestor of
$(git merge-base $merge_head $cur_branch)
meaning that instead of avoiding reapplying commits that upstream already
has, it actually includes more such commits. Combined with the fact that
format-patch can no longer detect commits that are already upstream (since
it is no longer told what upstream is), results in lots of confusion for
users (e.g. "git is giving me lots of conflicts in stuff I didn't even
change since my last push.")
Cases where additional commits could be reapplied include forking from a
commit other than the tracking branch, or amending/rebasing after pushing.
Cases where the inability to detect upstreamed commits cause problems
include independent discovery of a fix and having your patches get
upstreamed by some alternative route (e.g. pulling your changes to a third
machine, pushing from there, and then going back to your original machine
and trying to pull --rebase).
Fix the non-rebased upstream case by ignoring $old_remote_ref whenever it
is contained in $(git merge-base $merge_head $cur_branch). This should
have no affect on the rebased upstream case.
Acked-by: Santi Béjar <santi@agolina.net>
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
In tests, call test_cmp rather than raw diff where possible (i.e. if
the output does not go to a pipe), to allow the use of, say, 'cmp'
when the default 'diff -u' is not compatible with a vendor diff.
When that is not possible, use $DIFF, as set in GIT-BUILD-OPTIONS.
Signed-off-by: Gary V. Vaughan <gary@thewrittenword.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
When doing a "pull --rebase", we check to make sure that the index and
working tree are clean. The index-clean check compares the index against
HEAD. The test erroneously reports dirtiness if we don't have a HEAD yet.
In such an "unborn branch" case, by definition, a non-empty index won't
be based on whatever we are pulling down from the remote, and will lose
the local change. Just check if $GIT_DIR/index exists and error out.
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
You cannot do a "git pull --rebase" with a rebased upstream, if you have
already run "git fetch". Try to behave as if the "git fetch" was not run.
In other words, find the fork point of the current branch, where
the tip of upstream branch used to be, and use it as the upstream
parameter of "git rebase".
This patch computes the fork point by walking the reflog to find the first
commit which is an ancestor of the current branch. Maybe there are
smarter ways to compute it, but this is a straight forward implementation.
Signed-off-by: Santi Béjar <santi@agolina.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
If your upstream has rebased you can do:
git pull --rebase
but only if you haven't fetch before.
Mark this case as test_expect_failure, in a later patch it will be
changed to test_expect_success.
Signed-off-by: Santi Béjar <santi@agolina.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Expand get_remote_merge_branch to compute the tracking branch to merge
when called without arguments (or only the remote name). This allows
"git pull --rebase" without arguments (default upstream branch) to
work with a rebased upstream. With explicit arguments it already worked.
Also add a test to check for this case.
Signed-off-by: Santi Béjar <santi@agolina.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
