In bcfc82bd48 (branch: description for non-existent branch errors,
2022-10-08) we checked the HEAD in the current worktree to detect if the
branch to operate with is an orphan branch, so as to avoid the confusing
error: "No branch named...".
If we are asked to operate with an orphan branch in a different working
tree than the current one, we need to check the HEAD in that different
working tree.
Let's extend the check we did in bcfc82bd48, to check the HEADs in all
worktrees linked to the current repository, using the helper introduced
in 31ad6b61bd (branch: add branch_checked_out() helper, 2022-06-15).
The helper, branch_checked_out(), does its work obtaining internally a
list of worktrees linked to the current repository. Obtaining that list
is not a lightweight work because it implies disk access.
In copy_or_rename_branch() we already have a list of worktrees. Let's
use that already obtained list, and avoid using here the helper.
Signed-off-by: Rubén Justo <rjusto@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
When the repository does not yet have commits, some errors describe that
there is no branch:
$ git init -b first
$ git branch --edit-description first
error: No branch named 'first'.
$ git branch --set-upstream-to=upstream
fatal: branch 'first' does not exist
$ git branch -c second
error: refname refs/heads/first not found
fatal: Branch copy failed
That "first" branch is unborn but to say it doesn't exists is confusing.
Options "-c" (copy) and "-m" (rename) show the same error when the
origin branch doesn't exists:
$ git branch -c non-existent-branch second
error: refname refs/heads/non-existent-branch not found
fatal: Branch copy failed
$ git branch -m non-existent-branch second
error: refname refs/heads/non-existent-branch not found
fatal: Branch rename failed
Note that "--edit-description" without an explicit argument is already
considering the _empty repository_ circumstance in its error. Also note
that "-m" on the initial branch it is an allowed operation.
Make the error descriptions for those branch operations with unborn or
non-existent branches, more informative.
This is the result of the change:
$ git init -b first
$ git branch --edit-description first
error: No commit on branch 'first' yet.
$ git branch --set-upstream-to=upstream
fatal: No commit on branch 'first' yet.
$ git branch -c second
fatal: No commit on branch 'first' yet.
$ git branch [-c/-m] non-existent-branch second
fatal: No branch named 'non-existent-branch'.
Signed-off-by: Rubén Justo <rjusto@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
When "--current" is given to "git show-branch" running in the
"--reflog" mode, the code tries to reference a "reflog" message
that does not even exist. This is because the --current is not
prepared to work in that mode.
The reason "--current" exists is to support this request:
I list branches on the command line. These are the branchesI
care about and I use as anchoring points. I may or may not be on
one of these main branches. Please make sure I can view the
commits on the current branch with respect to what is in these
other branches.
And to serve that request, the code checks if the current branch is
among the ones listed on the command line, and adds it only if it is
not to the end of one array, which essentially lists the objects.
The reflog mode additionally uses another array to list reflog
messages, which the "--current" code does not add to. This leaves
one uninitialized slot at the end of the array of reflog messages,
and causes the program to show garbage or segfault.
Catch the unsupported (and meaningless) combination and exit with a
usage error.
There are other combinations of options that are incompatible but
have not been tested. Add test to cover them while adding coverage
for this new combination.
Reported-by: Gregory David <gregory.david@p1sec.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Broken &&-chains in the test scripts have been corrected.
* es/test-chain-lint:
t6000-t9999: detect and signal failure within loop
t5000-t5999: detect and signal failure within loop
t4000-t4999: detect and signal failure within loop
t0000-t3999: detect and signal failure within loop
tests: simplify by dropping unnecessary `for` loops
tests: apply modern idiom for exiting loop upon failure
tests: apply modern idiom for signaling test failure
tests: fix broken &&-chains in `{...}` groups
tests: fix broken &&-chains in `$(...)` command substitutions
tests: fix broken &&-chains in compound statements
tests: use test_write_lines() to generate line-oriented output
tests: simplify construction of large blocks of text
t9107: use shell parameter expansion to avoid breaking &&-chain
t6300: make `%(raw:size) --shell` test more robust
t5516: drop unnecessary subshell and command invocation
t4202: clarify intent by creating expected content less cleverly
t1020: avoid aborting entire test script when one test fails
t1010: fix unnoticed failure on Windows
t/lib-pager: use sane_unset() to avoid breaking &&-chain
Failures within `for` and `while` loops can go unnoticed if not detected
and signaled manually since the loop itself does not abort when a
contained command fails, nor will a failure necessarily be detected when
the loop finishes since the loop returns the exit code of the last
command it ran on the final iteration, which may not be the command
which failed. Therefore, detect and signal failures manually within
loops using the idiom `|| return 1` (or `|| exit 1` within subshells).
Signed-off-by: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
Reviewed-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Before, --reflog option would look for '\t' in the reflog message. As refs.c
already parses the reflog line, the '\t' was never found, and show-branch
--reflog would always say "(none)" as reflog message
Add test.
Signed-off-by: Han-Wen Nienhuys <hanwen@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Add missing tests for --remotes, --list and --merge-base. These are
not exhaustive, but better than the nothing we have now.
There were some tests for this command added in f76412ed6d ([PATCH]
Add 'git show-branch'., 2005-08-21) has never been properly tested,
namely for the --all option in t6432-merge-recursive-space-options.sh,
and some of --merge-base and --independent in t6010-merge-base.sh.
This fixes a few more blind spots, but there's still a lot of behavior
that's not tested for.
These new tests show the odd (and possibly unintentional) behavior of
--merge-base with one argument, and how its output is the same as "git
merge-base" with N bases in this particular case. See the test added
in f621a8454d (git-merge-base/git-show-branch --merge-base:
Documentation and test, 2009-08-05) for a case where the two aren't
the same.
Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Change the colored output introduced in ab07ba2a24 (show-branch: color
the commit status signs, 2009-04-22) to not color and reset each
individual space character we use for padding. The intent is to color
just the "!", "+" etc. characters.
This makes the output easier to test, so let's do that now. The test
would be much more verbose without a color/reset for each space
character. Since the coloring cycles through colors we previously had
a "rainbow of space characters".
In theory this breaks things for anyone who's relying on the exact
colored output of show-branch, in practice I'd think anyone parsing it
isn't actively turning on the colored output.
Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Modernize test code added in ce567d1867 (Add test to show that
show-branch misses out the 8th column, 2008-07-23) and
11ee57bc4c (sort_in_topological_order(): avoid setting a commit flag,
2008-07-23) to use test helpers.
I'm renaming "out" to "actual" for consistency with other tests, and
introducing a "branches.sorted" file in the setup, to make it clear
that it's important that the list be sorted in this particular way.
The "show-branch" output is indented with spaces, which would cause
complaints under "git show --check" with an indented here-doc
block. Let's prefix the lines with "> " to work around that, and to
make it clear that the leading whitespace is important.
We can also get rid of the hardcoding of "main" added here in
334afbc76f (tests: mark tests relying on the current default for
`init.defaultBranch`, 2020-11-18). For this test we're setting up an
"initial" commit anyway, and now that we've moved over to test_commit
we can reference that instead.
Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Rename the only *show-branch* test file to indicate that more tests
belong it in than just the one-off octopus test it now contains.
The test was initially added in ce567d1867 (Add test to show that
show-branch misses out the 8th column, 2008-07-23) and
11ee57bc4c (sort_in_topological_order(): avoid setting a commit flag,
2008-07-23). Those two add almost the same content, one with a
test_expect_success and the other a test_expect_failure (a bug being
tested for was fixed on one of the branches).
Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2021-06-15 12:12:01 +09:00
Renamed from t/t3202-show-branch-octopus.sh (Browse further)
