It is currently in section 1, but that section is intended for
"Executable programs or shell commands".
A more appropriate place is section 7: "Miscellaneous (including macro
packages and conventions), e.g. man(7), groff(7)".
This issue should have been detected earlier by `make check-docs`, but
was missed due to a bug in that Makefile target (that we are about to
fix).
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The git-over-rsync protocol is inefficient and broken, and
has been for a long time. It transfers way more objects than
it needs (grabbing all of the remote's "objects/",
regardless of which objects we need). It does its own ad-hoc
parsing of loose and packed refs from the remote, but
doesn't properly override packed refs with loose ones,
leading to garbage results (e.g., expecting the other side
to have an object pointed to by a stale packed-refs entry,
or complaining that the other side has two copies of the
refs[1]).
This latter breakage means that nobody could have
successfully pulled from a moderately active repository
since cd547b4 (fetch/push: readd rsync support, 2007-10-01).
We never made an official deprecation notice in the release
notes for git's rsync protocol, but the tutorial has marked
it as such since 914328a (Update tutorial., 2005-08-30).
And on the mailing list as far back as Oct 2005, we can find
Junio mentioning it as having "been deprecated for quite
some time."[2,3,4]. So it was old news then; cogito had
deprecated the transport in July of 2005[5] (though it did
come back briefly when Linus broke git-http-pull!).
Of course some people professed their love of rsync through
2006, but Linus clarified in his usual gentle manner[6]:
> Thanks! This is why I still use rsync, even though
> everybody and their mother tells me "Linus says rsync is
> deprecated."
No. You're using rsync because you're actively doing
something _wrong_.
The deprecation sentiment was reinforced in 2008, with a
mention that cloning via rsync is broken (with no fix)[7].
Even the commit porting rsync over to C from shell (cd547b4)
lists it as deprecated! So between the 10 years of informal
warnings, and the fact that it has been severely broken
since 2007, it's probably safe to simply remove it without
further deprecation warnings.
[1] http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/285101
[2] http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/10093
[3] http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/17734
[4] http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/18911
[5] http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/5617
[6] http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/19354
[7] http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/103635
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The fact that the git:// transport does no authentication is easily
overlooked. For example, DNS poisoning may result in fetching from
somewhere that was not intended.
Add a brief security notice to the "GIT URLS" section
of the documentation stating that the git transport should be used
with caution on unsecured networks.
Signed-off-by: Fraser Tweedale <frase@frase.id.au>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
file:///path/to/repo.git/ is converted to a hyperlink while others are
not. Put a backslash to avoid the conversion. Tested with asciidoc
8.6.5.
Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Usually "foo:bar" is interpreted as an ssh url. This patch allows to
clone from such paths by putting at least one slash before the colon
(i.e. /path/to/foo:bar or just ./foo:bar).
file://foo:bar should also work, but local optimizations are off in
that case, which may be unwanted. While at there, warn the users about
--local being ignored in this case.
Reported-by: William Giokas <1007380@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
"git help remote-helpers" did not work; 'remote-helpers' is not
a subcommand name but a concept, so its documentation should have
been in gitremote-helpers, not git-remote-helpers.
* jk/remote-helpers-doc:
Rename {git- => git}remote-helpers.txt
When looking up a topic via "git help <topic>", git-help prepends "git-"
to topics that are the names of commands (either builtin or found on the
path) and "git" (no hyphen) to any other topic name.
"git-remote-helpers" is not the name of a command, so "git help
remote-helpers" looks for "gitremote-helpers" and does not find it.
Fix this by renaming "git-remote-helpers.txt" to
"gitremote-helpers.txt".
Signed-off-by: John Keeping <john@keeping.me.uk>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
It is not even worth mentioning their removal; just discourage
people from using them.
Signed-off-by: Ramkumar Ramachandra <artagnon@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Rewrite the first part of the document to explicitly show differences
between the URLs that can be used with different transport
protocols. Mention <transport>::<address> format to explicitly invoke
a remote helper.
Signed-off-by: Ramkumar Ramachandra <artagnon@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Sverre Rabbelier <srabbelier@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
In urls.txt (which is included from git-{clone,fetch,push}.txt)
several item lists are surrounded by example block markers. This is
problematic for two reasons:
- None of these lists are example lists, so they should not be marked as
such semantically.
- The html output looks weird (bulleted list with left sidebar).
Therefore, remove the example block markers. Output by the man backend
is unaffected.
Signed-off-by: Michael J Gruber <git@drmicha.warpmail.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
This configuration option allows systematically rewriting fetch-only URLs
to push-capable URLs when used with push. For instance:
[url "ssh://example.org/"]
pushInsteadOf = "git://example.org/"
This will allow clones of "git://example.org/path/to/repo" to subsequently
push to "ssh://example.org/path/to/repo", without manually configuring
pushurl for that remote.
Includes documentation for the new option, bash completion updates, and
test cases (both that pushInsteadOf applies to push, that it does not
apply to fetch, and that it is ignored when pushURL is already defined).
Signed-off-by: Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
This allows users with different preferences for access methods to the
same remote repositories to rewrite each other's URLs by pattern
matching across a large set of similiarly set up repositories to each
get the desired access.
For example, if you don't have a kernel.org account, you might want
settings like:
[url "git://git.kernel.org/pub/"]
insteadOf = master.kernel.org:/pub
Then, if you give git a URL like:
master.kernel.org:/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/linville/wireless-2.6.git
it will act like you gave it:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/linville/wireless-2.6.git
and you can cut-and-paste pull requests in email without fixing them
by hand, for example.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Barkalow <barkalow@iabervon.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Between AsciiDoc 8.2.2 and 8.2.3, the following change was made to the stock
Asciidoc configuration:
@@ -149,7 +153,10 @@
# Inline macros.
# Backslash prefix required for escape processing.
# (?s) re flag for line spanning.
-(?su)[\\]?(?P<name>\w(\w|-)*?):(?P<target>\S*?)(\[(?P<attrlist>.*?)\])=
+
+# Explicit so they can be nested.
+(?su)[\\]?(?P<name>(http|https|ftp|file|mailto|callto|image|link)):(?P<target>\S*?)(\[(?P<attrlist>.*?)\])=
+
# Anchor: [[[id]]]. Bibliographic anchor.
(?su)[\\]?\[\[\[(?P<attrlist>[\w][\w-]*?)\]\]\]=anchor3
# Anchor: [[id,xreflabel]]
This default regex now matches explicit values, and unfortunately in this
case gitlink was being matched by just 'link', causing the wrong inline
macro template to be applied. By renaming the macro, we can avoid being
matched by the wrong regex.
Signed-off-by: Dan McGee <dpmcgee@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Allow port specification in ssh:// URLs in the
usual notation:
ssh://[user@]host.domain[:<port>]/<path>
This allows git to be used over ssh-tunneling
networks.
Signed-off-by: Luben Tuikov <ltuikov@yahoo.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
This changes the behaviour of cloning from a repository on the
local machine, by defaulting to "-l" (use hardlinks to share
files under .git/objects) and making "-l" a no-op. A new
option, --no-hardlinks, is also added to cause file-level copy
of files under .git/objects while still avoiding the normal
"pack to pipe, then receive and index pack" network transfer
overhead. The old behaviour of local cloning without -l nor -s
is availble by specifying the source repository with the newly
introduced file:///path/to/repo.git/ syntax (i.e. "same as
network" cloning).
* With --no-hardlinks (i.e. have all .git/objects/ copied via
cpio) would not catch the source repository corruption, and
also risks corrupted recipient repository if an
alpha-particle hits memory cell while indexing and resolving
deltas. As long as the recipient is created uncorrupted, you
have a good back-up.
* same-as-network is expensive, but it would catch the breakage
of the source repository. It still risks corrupted recipient
repository due to hardware failure. As long as the recipient
is created uncorrupted, you have a good back-up.
* The new default on the same filesystem, as long as the source
repository is healthy, it is very likely that the recipient
would be, too. Also it is very cheap. You do not get any
back-up benefit, though.
None of the method is resilient against the source repository
corruption, so let's discount that from the comparison. Then
the difference with and without --no-hardlinks matters primarily
if you value the back-up benefit or not. If you want to use the
cloned repository as a back-up, then it is cheaper to do a clone
with --no-hardlinks and two git-fsck (source before clone,
recipient after clone) than same-as-network clone, especially as
you are likely to do a git-fsck on the recipient if you are so
paranoid anyway.
Which leads me to believe that being able to use file:/// is
probably a good idea, if only for testability, but probably of
little practical value. We default to hardlinked clone for
everyday use, and paranoids can use --no-hardlinks as a way to
make a back-up.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Since git-clone is one of the many commands taking
URLs to remote repositories as an argument, it should include
the URL-types list from urls.txt.
Split up urls.txt into urls.txt and urls-remotes.txt. The latter
should be used by anything besides git-clone where a discussion of
using .git/config and .git/remotes/ to name URLs just doesn't make
as much sense.
Signed-off-by: Andrew Ruder <andy@aeruder.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The line:
[remote "<remote>"]
was getting swallowed up by asciidoc, causing a critical line in the
explanation for how to store the .git/remotes information in .git/config
to go missing from the git-fetch, git-pull, and git-push manpages.
Put all of the examples into delimited blocks to fix this problem and to
make them look nicer.
Signed-off-by: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
This changes "[user@]" to use {startsb} and {endsb} to insert [ and ],
similar to how {caret} is used in git-rev-parse.txt.
[jc: Removed a well-intentioned comment that broke the final
formatting from the original patch. While we are at it,
updated the paragraph that claims to be equivalent to the
section that was updated earlier without making matching
changes.]
Signed-off-by: Jonas Fonseca <fonseca@diku.dk>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Earlier commit c3f17061 broke asciidoc markup.
Noticed by Alp Toker with a fix, but fixed up in a way with smaller
formatting impact.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
The sections on git urls and remotes files in the git-fetch,
git-pull, and git-push manpages seem long enough to be worth a
manpage section of their own.
Signed-off-by: J. Bruce Fields <bfields@citi.umich.edu>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
The push and pull man pages include a bunch of shared text from
pull-fetch-param.txt. This simplifies maintenance somewhat, but
there's actually quite a bit of text that applies only to one or the
other.
So, separate out the push- and pull/fetch-specific text into
pull-fetch-param.txt and git-push.txt, then include the largest chunk
of common stuff (the description of protocols and url's) from
urls.txt. That cuts some irrelevant stuff from the man pages without
making us duplicate too much.
Signed-off-by: J. Bruce Fields <bfields@citi.umich.edu>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
