When we want to write out a loose object file, we have
always first made sure we don't already have the object
somewhere. Since 33d4221 (write_sha1_file: freshen existing
objects, 2014-10-15), we also update the timestamp on the
file, so that a simultaneous prune knows somebody is
likely to reference it soon.
If our utime() call fails, we treat this the same as not
having the object in the first place; the safe thing to do
is write out another copy. However, the loose-object check
accidentally inverts the utime() check; it returns failure
_only_ when the utime() call actually succeeded. Thus it was
failing to protect us there, and in the normal case where
utime() succeeds, it caused us to pointlessly write out and
link the object.
This passed our freshening tests, because writing out the
new object is certainly _one_ way of updating its utime. So
the normal case was inefficient, but not wrong.
While we're here, let's also drop a comment in front of the
check_and_freshen functions, making a note of their return
type (since it is not our usual "0 for success, -1 for
error").
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Since e481af06 (rebase: Handle cases where format-patch fails) we
notice if format-patch fails and return immediately from
git-rebase--am. We save the return value with ret=$?, but then we
return $?, which is usually zero in this case.
Fix this by returning $ret instead.
Cc: Andrew Wong <andrew.kw.w@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Clemens Buchacher <clemens.buchacher@intel.com>
Helped-by: Jorge Nunes <jorge.nunes@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The term "index" is translated as "Staging-Area" to
match a majority of German books and to not confuse
Git beginners who don't know about Git's index.
"Staging Area" is used in German books as a thing where
content can be staged for commit. While the translation
is good for those kind of messages, it's bad for messages
that mean the Git index as the tree state or the index
file, in which case we should translate as "Index".
Signed-off-by: Ralf Thielow <ralf.thielow@gmail.com>
As a safeguard, checking out a branch already checked out by a different
worktree is disallowed. This behavior can be overridden with
--ignore-other-worktrees, however, this option is neither obvious nor
particularly discoverable. As a common safeguard override, --force is
more likely to come to mind. Therefore, overload it to also suppress the
check for a branch already checked out elsewhere.
Signed-off-by: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
As a convenience, when <branch> is omitted from "git worktree <path>
<branch>" and neither -b nor -B is used, automatically create a new
branch named after <path>, as if "-b $(basename <path>)" was specified.
Thus, "git worktree add ../hotfix" creates a new branch named "hotfix"
and associates it with new worktree "../hotfix".
Signed-off-by: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
As a convenience, like "git branch" and "git checkout -b", make
"git worktree add -b <newbranch> <path> <branch>" default to HEAD when
<branch> is omitted.
Signed-off-by: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
A subsequent patch will also need to compute the basename of the new
worktree, so factor out this logic into a new function.
Signed-off-by: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
In order to allow linked worktree creation via "git checkout --to" from
a bare repository, 3473ad0 (checkout: don't require a work tree when
checking out into a new one, 2014-11-30) dropped git-checkout's
unconditional NEED_WORK_TREE requirement and instead performed worktree
setup conditionally based upon presence or absence of the --to option.
Now that --to has been retired and git-checkout is no longer responsible
for linked worktree creation, the NEED_WORK_TREE requirement can be
re-instated.
This effectively reverts 3473ad0, except for the tests it added which
now check bare repository behavior of "git worktree add" instead.
Signed-off-by: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Now that "git worktree add" has achieved user-facing feature-parity with
"git checkout --to", retire the latter.
Move the actual linked worktree creation functionality,
prepare_linked_checkout() and its helpers, verbatim from checkout.c to
worktree.c.
This effectively reverts changes to checkout.c by 529fef2 (checkout:
support checking out into a new working directory, 2014-11-30) with the
exception of merge_working_tree() and switch_branches() which still
require specialized knowledge that a the checkout is occurring in a
newly-created linked worktree (signaled to them by the private
GIT_CHECKOUT_NEW_WORKTREE environment variable).
Signed-off-by: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
With the introduction of "git worktree add", "git checkout --to" is
slated for removal. Therefore, retrofit linked worktree creation tests
to use "git worktree add" instead.
(The test to check exclusivity of "checkout --to" and "checkout <paths>"
is dropped altogether since it becomes meaningless with retirement of
"checkout --to".)
Signed-off-by: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
One of git-worktree's roles is to populate the new worktree, much like
git-checkout, and thus, for convenience, ought to support several of the
same shortcuts. Toward this goal, add -b/-B options to create a new
branch and check it out in the new worktree.
(For brevity, only -b is mentioned in the synopsis; -B is omitted.)
Signed-off-by: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
One of git-worktree's roles is to populate the new worktree, much like
git-checkout, and thus, for convenience, ought to support several of the
same shortcuts. Toward this goal, add a --detach option to detach HEAD
in the new worktree.
Signed-off-by: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
By default, "git worktree add" refuses to create a new worktree when
the requested branch is already checked out elsewhere. Add a --force
option to override this safeguard.
Signed-off-by: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The plan is to relocate "git checkout --to" functionality to "git
worktree add". As a first step, introduce a bare-bones git-worktree
"add" command along with documentation. At this stage, "git worktree
add" merely invokes "git checkout --to" behind the scenes, but an
upcoming patch will move the actual functionality
(checkout.c:prepare_linked_checkout() and its helpers) to worktree.c.
Signed-off-by: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The plan is to relocate "git checkout --to" functionality to "git
worktree add", however, worktree.c won't have access to the 'struct
checkout_opts' passed to prepare_linked_worktree(), which it consults
for the pathname of the new worktree and the argv[] of the command it
should run to populate the new worktree. Facilitate relocation of
prepare_linked_worktree() by instead having it accept the pathname and
argv[] directly, thus eliminating the final references to 'struct
checkout_opts'.
Signed-off-by: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
prepare_linked_checkout() respects git-checkout's --quiet flag, however,
the plan is to relocate "git checkout --to" functionality to "git
worktree add", and git-worktree does not (yet) have a --quiet flag.
Consequently, make prepare_linked_checkout() unconditionally verbose to
ease eventual code movement to worktree.c.
(A --quiet flag can be added to git-worktree later if there is demand
for it.)
Signed-off-by: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The only references to 'new' were folded out by the last two patches.
Signed-off-by: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The plan is to relocate "git checkout --to" functionality to "git
worktree add", however, this check expects a 'struct branch_info' which
git-worktree won't have at hand. It will, however, have access to its
own command-line from which it can pick up the branch name. Therefore,
as a preparatory step, rather than having prepare_linked_checkout()
perform this check, make it the caller's responsibility.
Signed-off-by: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Given "git checkout --to <path> HEAD~1", the new worktree's HEAD should
begin life at the current branch's HEAD~1, however, it actually ends up
at HEAD~2. This happens because:
1. git-checkout resolves HEAD~1
2. to satisfy is_git_directory(), prepare_linked_worktree() creates
a HEAD for the new worktree with the value of the resolved HEAD~1
3. git-checkout re-invokes itself with the same arguments within the
new worktree to populate the worktree
4. the sub git-checkout resolves HEAD~1 relative to its own HEAD,
which is the resolved HEAD~1 from the original invocation,
resulting unexpectedly and incorrectly in HEAD~2 (relative to the
original)
Fix this by unconditionally assigning the current worktree's HEAD as the
value of the new worktree's HEAD.
As a side-effect, this change also eliminates a dependence within
prepare_linked_checkout() upon 'struct branch_info'. The plan is to
eventually relocate "git checkout --to" functionality to "git worktree
add", and worktree.c won't have knowledge of 'struct branch_info', so
removal of this dependency is a step toward that goal.
Signed-off-by: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Due to the (current) absence of a "git worktree lock" command, locking
a worktree's administrative files to prevent automatic pruning is a
manual task, necessarily requiring low-level understanding of linked
worktree functionality. However, this level of detail does not belong
in the high-level DESCRIPTION section, so add a generalized discussion
of locking to DESCRIPTION and move the technical information to DETAILS.
Signed-off-by: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The DESCRIPTION section should provide a high-level overview of linked
worktree functionality to bring users up to speed quickly, without
overloading them with low-level details, so relocate the technical
information to a new DETAILS section.
Signed-off-by: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Relocate submodule warning to BUGS and enumerate missing commands.
Signed-off-by: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Now that the git-worktree command exists, its documentation page is the
natural place for the linked worktree description to reside. Relocate
the "MULTIPLE WORKING TREES" description verbatim from git-checkout.txt
to git-worktree.txt.
Signed-off-by: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
git-worktree options affect some worktree commands but not others, but
this is not necessarily obvious from the option descriptions. Make this
clear by indicating explicitly which commands are affected by which
options.
Signed-off-by: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
This was missed when "git prune --worktrees" became "git worktree prune".
Signed-off-by: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Now that we have proper documentation for --force's interaction with -d
and -m, we can avoid duplication and consider -M and -D as convenience
aliases for -m --force and -d --force.
Signed-off-by: Matthieu Moy <Matthieu.Moy@imag.fr>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The --force option was modified in 356e91f (branch: allow -f with -m and
-d, 2014-12-08), but the documentation was not updated.
Signed-off-by: Matthieu Moy <Matthieu.Moy@imag.fr>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The only change is a bugfix: the SMTP mailer was not working with
Python 2.4.
Signed-off-by: Matthieu Moy <Matthieu.Moy@imag.fr>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
When c6458e60 (index-pack: kill union delta_base to save memory,
2015-04-18) attempted to reduce the memory footprint of index-pack,
one of the key thing it did was to keep track of ref-deltas and
ofs-deltas separately.
In fix_unresolved_deltas(), however it forgot that it now wants to
look only at ref deltas in one place. The code allocated an array
for nr_unresolved, which is sum of number of ref- and ofs-deltas
minus nr_resolved, which may be larger or smaller than the number
ref-deltas. Depending on nr_resolved, this was either under or over
allocating.
Also, the old code before this change had to use 'i' and 'n' because
some of the things we see in the (old) deltas[] array we scanned
with 'i' would not make it into the sorted_by_pos[] array in the old
world order, but now because you have only ref delta in a separate
ref_deltas[] array, they increment lock&step. We no longer need
separate variables. And most importantly, we shouldn't pass the
nr_unresolved parameter, as this number does not play a role in the
working of this helper function.
Helped-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
It is currently declared to return int, which could overflow for
large files.
Signed-off-by: Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Since 2e6c012e (setup_pager: set GIT_PAGER_IN_USE, 2011-08-17), we
export GIT_PAGER_IN_USE so that a process that becomes the upstream
of the spawned pager can still tell that we have spawned the pager
and decide to do colored output even when its output no longer goes
to a terminal (i.e. isatty(1)).
But we forgot to clear it from the enviornment of the spawned pager.
This is not a problem in a sane world, but if you have a handful of
thousands Git users in your organization, somebody is bound to do
strange things, e.g. typing "!<ENTER>" instead of 'q' to get control
back from $LESS. GIT_PAGER_IN_USE is still set in that subshell
spawned by "less", and all sorts of interesting things starts
happening, e.g. "git diff | cat" starts coloring its output.
We can clear the environment variable in the half of the fork that
runs the pager to avoid the confusion.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Acked-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
"git fetch --depth=<depth>" and "git clone --depth=<depth>" issued
a shallow transfer request even to an upload-pack that does not
support the capability.
* me/fetch-into-shallow-safety:
fetch-pack: check for shallow if depth given
Hotfix for an earlier change already in 'master' that broke the
default tool selection for mergetool.
* da/mergetool-winmerge:
mergetool-lib: fix default tool selection
The reachability bitmaps do not have enough information to
tell us which commits might have changed path "foo", so the
current code produces wrong answers for:
git rev-list --use-bitmap-index --count HEAD -- foo
(it silently ignores the "foo" limiter). Instead, we should
fall back to doing a normal traversal (it is OK to fall
back rather than complain, because --use-bitmap-index is a
pure optimization, and might not kick in for other reasons,
such as there being no bitmaps in the repository).
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Commit 28fcc0b (pathspec: avoid the need of "--" when wildcard is used -
2015-05-02) changes how the disambiguation rules work. This patch adds
some tests to demonstrate, basically, if wildcard characters are in an
argument:
- if the argument is valid extended sha-1 syntax, "--" must be used
- otherwise the argument is considered a path, even without "--"
And wildcard can appear in extended sha-1 syntax, either as part of
regex in ":/<regex>" or as the literal path in ":<path>". The latter
case is less likely to happen in real world. But if you do ":/" a lot,
you may need to type "--" more.
Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
--count should be mentioned in the usage guide, this updates code and
documentation.
Signed-off-by: Lawrence Siebert <lawrencesiebert@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Renaming to an existing file doesn't work on Windows network shares if the
target file is open.
munmap() the old config file before commit_lock_file.
Signed-off-by: Karsten Blees <blees@dcon.de>
Acked-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Acked-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
When skipping commits whose changes were already applied via `git rebase
--continue`, we need to clean up said file explicitly.
The same is not true for `git rebase --skip` because that will execute
`git reset --hard` as part of the "skip" handling in git-rebase.sh, even
before git-rebase--interactive.sh is called.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
When rev-list's --cherry option does not detect that a patch has already
been applied upstream, an interactive rebase would offer to reapply it and
consequently stop at that patch with a failure, mentioning that the diff
is empty.
Traditionally, a `git rebase --continue` simply skips the commit in such a
situation.
However, as pointed out by Gábor Szeder, this leaves a CHERRY_PICK_HEAD
behind, making the Git prompt believe that a cherry pick is still going
on. This commit adds a test case demonstrating this bug.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
