"git describe" takes a commit and gives it a name based on tags in
its neighbourhood. The command does take a commit-ish but when
given a tag that points at a commit, it should dereference the tag
before computing the name for the commit.
As the whole processing is internally delegated to name-rev, if we
unwrap tags down to the underlying commit when invoking name-rev, it
will make the name-rev issue an error message based on the unwrapped
object name (i.e. either 40-hex object name, or "$tag^0") that is
different from what the end-user gave to the command when the commit
cannot be described. Introduce an internal option --peel-tag to the
name-rev to tell it to unwrap a tag in its input from the command
line.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
"git name-rev --stdin" has been fixed to convert an object name that
points at a tag to a refname of the tag. The codepath to handle its
command line arguments, however, fed the commit that the tag points
at to the underlying naming machinery.
With this fix, you will get this:
$ git name-rev --refs=tags/\* --name-only $(git rev-parse v1.8.3 v1.8.3^0)
v1.8.3
v1.8.3^0
which is the same as what you would get from the fixed "--stdin" variant:
$ git rev-parse v1.8.3 v1.8.3^0 | git name-rev --refs=tags/\* --name-only
v1.8.3
v1.8.3^0
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Only consider the first parent commit when walking the commit history. This
is useful if you only wish to match tags on your branch after a merge.
Signed-off-by: Mike Crowe <mac@mcrowe.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
If more than one annotated tag points at the same commit, use the
tag whose tagger field has a more recent date stamp. This resolves
non-deterministic cases where the maintainer has done:
$ git tag -a -m "2.1-rc1" v2.1-rc1 deadbeef
$ git tag -a -m "2.1" v2.1 deadbeef
If the tag is an older-style annotated tag with no tagger date, we
assume a date stamp at the UNIX epoch. This will cause us to prefer
an annotated tag that has a valid date.
We could also try to consider the tag object chain, favoring a tag
that "includes" another one:
$ git tag -a -m "2.1-rc0" v2.1-rc1 deadbeef
$ git tag -a -m "2.1" v2.1 v2.1-rc1
However traversing the tag's object chain looking for inclusion
is much more complicated. Its already very likely that even in
these cases the v2.1 tag will have a more recent tagger date than
v2.1-rc1, so with this change describe should still resolve this
by selecting the more recent v2.1.
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
4d23660 (describe: when failing, tell the user about options that
work, 2009-10-28) forgot to update the shortcut path where the code
detected and used a possible exact match. This means that an
unannotated tag on HEAD would be used by 'git describe'.
Guard this code path against the new circumstances, where unannotated
tags can be present in ->util even if we're not actually planning to
use them.
While there, also add some tests for --all.
Reported by 'yashi' on IRC.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Rast <trast@student.ethz.ch>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
With the --dirty option, git describe works on HEAD but append s"-dirty"
iff the contents of the work tree differs from HEAD. E.g.
$ git describe --dirty
v1.6.5-15-gc274db7
$ echo >> Makefile
$ git describe --dirty
v1.6.5-15-gc274db7-dirty
The --dirty option can also be used to specify what is appended, instead
of the default string "-dirty".
$ git describe --dirty=.mod
v1.6.5-15-gc274db7.mod
Many build scripts use `git describe` to produce a version number based on
the description of HEAD (on which the work tree is based) + saying that if
the build contains uncommitted changes. This patch helps the writing of
such scripts since `git describe --dirty` does directly the intended thing.
Three possiblities were considered while discussing this new feature:
1. Describe the work tree by default and describe HEAD only if "HEAD" is
explicitly specified
Pro: does the right thing by default (both for users and for scripts)
Pro: other git commands that works on the work tree by default
Con: breaks existing scripts used by the Linux kernel and other projects
2. Use --worktree instead of --dirty
Pro: does what it says: "git describe --worktree" describes the work tree
Con: other commands do not require a --worktree option when working
on the work tree (it often is the default mode for them)
Con: unusable with an optional value: "git describe --worktree=.mod"
is quite unintuitive.
3. Use --dirty as in this patch
Pro: makes sense to specify an optional value (what the dirty mark is)
Pro: does not have any of the big cons of previous alternatives
* does not break scripts
* is not inconsistent with other git commands
This patch takes the third approach.
Signed-off-by: Jean Privat <jean@pryen.org>
Acked-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
This fixes a regression introduce by d68dc34 (git-describe: Die early if
there are no possible descriptions, 2009-08-06).
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
In 212945d4 ("Teach git-describe to verify annotated tag names
before output") git-describe learned how to output a warning if
an annotated tag object was matched but its internal name doesn't
match the local ref name.
However, "git describe --all" causes the local ref name to be
prefixed with "tags/", so we need to skip over this prefix before
comparing the local ref name with the name recorded inside of the
tag object.
Patch-by: René Scharfe <rene.scharfe@lsrfire.ath.cx>
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
If the caller supplies --tags they want the lightweight, unannotated
tags to be searched for a match. If a lightweight tag is closer
in the history, it should be matched, even if an annotated tag is
reachable further back in the commit chain.
The same applies with --all when matching any other type of ref.
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Acked-By: Uwe Kleine-König <ukleinek@strlen.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
If we match a lightweight (non-annotated tag) as the name to
output and --long was requested we do not have a tag, nor do
we have a tagged object to display. Instead we must use the
object we were passed as input for the long format display.
Reported-by: Mark Burton <markb@ordern.com>
Backtraced-by: Mikael Magnusson <mikachu@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The <pattern> given "git describe --match" was used only to filter tag
objects, and not to filter lightweight tags. This fixes it.
[jc: made the log to clarify this is a bugfix, not an enhancement, with
additional test]
Signed-off-by: Michael Dressel <MichaelTiloDressel@t-online.de>
Acked-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
As a general principle, we should not use "git diff" to validate the
results of what git command that is being tested has done. We would not
know if we are testing the command in question, or locating a bug in the
cute hack of "git diff --no-index".
Rather use test_cmp for that purpose.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Existing test checked --long only for exactly tagged commit. We should
make sure it works sensibly for commits that are not tagged.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Back in 212945d4 ("Teach git-describe to verify annotated tag names
before output") I taught git-describe to output the name shown in the
"tag" header of an annotated tag, rather than the name it is actually
stored under in this repository's ref namespace.
This test case verifies this is working correctly by renaming the ref
for an annotated tag to a different name that what is recorded in the
tag body, and verifying that tag is returned. We also verify there is
a message shown on stderr to inform the user that the tag is possibly
stored under the wrong name locally.
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
In c374b91c ("git-describe: use tags found in packed-refs correctly")
Junio fixed an issue where git-describe did not parse a tag object it
obtained from a packed-refs file, as the peel information was read in
from packed-refs and not the tag object itself.
This new test case verifies the fix listed above is functioning, and
does not have a regression in the future.
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
If git-describe fails we never execute the test_expect_success,
so we never actually test for failure. This is horribly wrong.
We need to always run the test case, but the test case is only
supposed to succeed if the prior git-describe returned 0.
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
This is useful when you want to see parts of the commit object name
in "describe" output, even when the commit in question happens to be
a tagged version. Instead of just emitting the tag name, it will
describe such a commit as v1.2-0-deadbeef (0th commit since tag v1.2
that points at object deadbeef....).
Signed-off-by: Santi Béjar <sbejar@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
