The default can also be changed with "format.suffix" configuration.
Leaving it empty would not add any suffix.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Add discussion section to git-checkout documentation and mention
detached HEAD in repository-layout document.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
This allows "git checkout -m <other-branch>" to notice renames and
carry local changes in the working tree forward.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
* Promiscous pull shows the distributed nature of git better.
* Add a new step after that to teach "remote add".
* Highlight that with the shorthand defined you will get
remote tracking branches for free.
* Fix Alice's workflow.
Signed-off-by: Santi Béjar <sbejar@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
From time to time, I would get this error:
[...]
sed: -e expression #8, char 41: Unterminated `s' command
make: *** [git-add--interactive] Error 1
Turns out that the function WriteMakefile() called in Makefile.PL
outputs the message "Writing perl.mak for Git" to stdout! Thus,
the output of "make -C perl -s --no-print-directory instlibdir"
would be prefixed by that message whenever Makefile.PL was newer
than perl.mak.
This is fixed by redirecting stdout to stderr in Makefile.PL.
Signed-off-by: Johannes E. Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
The text is just copied from git-send-pack.txt.
Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-K,Av(Bnig <zeisberg@informatik.uni-freiburg.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
People that redirect STDOUT output should always see STDERR
prompts interactively.
STDERR should always be flushed without buffering, so
they should always show up. If that is unset, we still
explicitly flush by calling STDERR->flush.
The svn command-line client prompts to STDERR, too.
Signed-off-by: Eric Wong <normalperson@yhbt.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
The reflog code clears empty directories when rename returns
either EISDIR or ENOTDIR. Seems to be the only place.
Signed-off-by: Jason Riedy <ejr@cs.berkeley.edu>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Not all echos know -n. This was causing a test failure in
t5401-update-hooks.sh, but not t3800-mktag.sh for some reason.
Signed-off-by: Jason Riedy <ejr@cs.berkeley.edu>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
AIX 5.3 seems to need _ALL_SOURCE for struct addrinfo, but that
introduces a struct list in grp.h.
Signed-off-by: Jason Riedy <ejr@cs.berkeley.edu>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
My bash refused to run the two scripts missing a #!, and it's
better to use the same line for all the scripts.
Signed-off-by: Jason Riedy <ejr@cs.berkeley.edu>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Instead, we complain to the user and suggest that they explicitly
specify the remote and branch. We depend on the exit status of
git-symbolic-ref, so let's go ahead and document that.
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
When we are on a detached HEAD, there is no current branch.
There is no reason to leak the error messages to the end user
since this is a situation we expect to see.
This adds -q option to git-symbolic-ref to exit without issuing
an error message if the given name is not a symbolic ref.
By the way, with or without this patch, there currently is no
good way to tell failure modes between "git symbolic-ref HAED"
and "git symbolic-ref HEAD". Both says "is not a symbolic ref".
We may want to do something about it.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
* git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/gitk/gitk:
[PATCH] Make gitk work when launched in a subdirectory
[PATCH] gitk: add current directory to main window title
Always call the current HEAD 'HEAD', and name the patch being
cherry-picked or reverted by its oneline subject rather than
its SHA1. This matches git am's behavior and is done because
users most commonly are cherry-picking by SHA1 rather than by
ref name.
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
This makes revert and cherry-pick to use merge-recursive, to
allow them to notice renames. A pair of test scripts
demonstrate that an old change before a rename happened can be
applied (reverted) after a rename with cherry-pick (with revert).
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
We've squelched output from merge-recursive, and git-merge when
used with recursive does not attempt the trivial one first
anymore, so there won't be "Trying ... Nope." messages now.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Currently we don't use the util field of struct commit but we want
fast access to the highest priority name that references any given
commit object during our matching loop. A really simple approach
is to just store the name directly in the util field.
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
We really want to always favor an annotated tag over a lightweight
tag when describing a commit. Unfortunately git-describe wasn't
doing this as it was favoring the depth attribute of a possible_tag
over the priority. Now priority is the highest sort and we only
consider a lightweight tag if no annotated tags were identified.
Rather than searching for the minimum tag using a simple loop we
now sort them using a stable sort algorithm, this way the possible
tags display in order if --debug gets used. The stable sort helps
to preseve the inherit topology/date order that we obtain during
our search loop.
This fix allows the tests in t6120-describe.sh to pass.
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
My prior version of git-describe ran very slowly on even reasonably
sized projects like git.git and linux.git as it tended to identify
a large number of possible tags and then needed to generate the
revision list for each of those tags to sort them and select the
best tag to describe the input commit.
All we really need is the number of commits in the input revision
which are not in the tag. We can generate these counts during
the revision walking and tag matching loop by assigning a color to
each tag and coloring the commits as we walk them. This limits us
to identifying no more than 26 possible tags, as there is limited
space available within the flags field of struct commit.
The limitation of 26 possible tags is hopefully not going to be a
problem in real usage, as most projects won't create 26 maintenance
releases and merge them back into a development trunk after the
development trunk was tagged with a release candidate tag. If that
does occur git-describe will start to revert to its old behavior of
using the newer maintenance release tag to describe the development
trunk, rather than the development trunk's own tag. The suggested
workaround would be to retag the development trunk's tip.
However since even 26 possible tags can take a while to generate a
description for on some projects I'm defaulting the limit to 10 but
offering the user --candidates to increase the number of possible
matches if they need a more accurate result. I specifically chose
10 for the default as it seems unlikely projects will have more
than 10 maintenance releases merged into a development trunk before
retagging the development trunk, and it seems to perform about the
same on linux.git as v1.4.4.4 git-describe.
A large amount of debugging information was also added during
the development of this change, so I've left it in to be toggled
on with --debug. It may be useful to the end user to help them
understand why git-describe took one particular tag over another.
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
If a project has a really huge number of tags (such as several
thousand tags) then we are likely to have nearly a hundred tags in
some buckets. Scanning those buckets as linked lists could take
a large amount of time if done repeatedly during history traversal.
Since we are searching for a unique commit SHA1 we can sort all
tags by commit SHA1 and perform a binary search within the bucket.
Once we identify a particular tag as matching this commit we walk
backwards within the bucket matches to make sure we pick up the
highest priority tag for that commit, as the binary search may
have landed us in the middle of a set of tags which point at the
same commit.
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
If a project has a very large number of tags then git-describe
will spend a good part of its time looping over the tags testing
them one at a time to determine if it matches a given commit.
For 10 tags this is not a big deal, but for hundreds of tags the
time could become considerable if we don't find an exact match for
the input commit and we need to walk back along the history chain.
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Several people have suggested that its always better to describe
a commit using an annotated tag, and to only use a lightweight tag
if absolutely no annotated tag matches the input commit.
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
1) talk about "git merge" instead of "git pull ."
2) suggest "git repo-config" instead of directly editing config files
3) echo "URL: blah" > .git/remotes/foo is obsolete and should be
"git repo-config remote.foo.url blah"
4) support for partial URL prefix has been removed (see commit
ea560e6d64) so drop mention of it.
Signed-off-by: Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
We say "this shows only the most often used ones"; so instead of
teaching --max-number=<n> form, list -<n> form which is much
easier to type.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Now that we are showing the output messages for verbosity levels
<5 after all actions have been performed (due to the progress meter
running during the actions) it can be confusing to see messages in
the present tense when the user is looking at a '100% done' message
right above them. Converting the messages to past tense will appear
more correct in this case, and shouldn't affect a developer who is
debugging the application and running it at a verbosity level >=5.
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Because large merges on slow systems can take up to a minute to
execute we should try to keep the user entertained with a progress
meter to let them know how far we have progressed through the
current merge.
The progress meter considers each entry in the in-memory index to
be a unit, which means a single recursive merge will double the
number of units in the progress meter. Files which are unmerged
after the 3-way tree merge are also considered a unit within the
progress meter.
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Buffering all message output until a merge invocation is complete is
necessary to prevent intereferring with a progress meter that would
indicate the number of files completely merged, and how many remain.
This change does not introduce a progress meter, but merely lays
the groundwork to buffer the output.
To aid debugging output buffering is only enabled if verbosity
is lower than 5. When using verbosity levels above 5 the user is
probably debugging the merge program itself and does not want to
see the output delayed, especially if they are stepping through
portions of the code in a debugger.
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net> writes:
>
> I think the output from merge-recursive can be categorized into 5
> verbosity levels:
>
> 1. "CONFLICT", "Rename", "Adding here instead due to D/F conflict"
> (outermost)
>
> 2. "Auto-merged successfully" (outermost)
>
> 3. The first "Merging X with Y".
>
> 4. outermost "Merging:\ntitle1\ntitle2".
>
> 5. outermost "found N common ancestors\nancestor1\nancestor2\n..."
> and anything from inner merge.
>
> I would prefer the default verbosity level to be 2 (that is, show
> both 1 and 2).
and this change makes it so. I think level 3 is probably pointless
as its only one line of output above level 2, but I can see how some
users may want to view it but not view the slightly more verbose
output of level 4.
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
