When rendering the troff manpages to text via "man", we create an ad-hoc
Makefile and feed it to "make". The purpose here is two-fold:
- reuse results from a prior interrupted render of the same tree
- use make's -j option to build in parallel
But the second part doesn't seem to work (at least with my version of
GNU make, 4.2.1). It just runs one render at a time.
We use a double-colon "all" rule for each file, like:
all:: foo
foo:
...actual render recipe...
all:: bar
bar:
...actual render recipe...
...and so on...
And it's this double-colon that seems to inhibit the parallelism. We can
just switch to a regular single-colon rule. Even though we do have
multiple rules for "all" here, we don't have any recipe to execute for
"all" (we only care about triggering its dependencies), so the
distinction is irrelevant.
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The example for the push.pushOption config tries to create a
preformatted section, but uses only two dashes in its "--" line. In
AsciiDoc this is an "open block", with no type; the lines end up jumbled
because they're formatted as paragraphs. We need four or more dashes to
make it a "listing block" that will respect the linebreaks.
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Code clean-up.
* jk/mailinfo-cleanup:
mailinfo: factor out some repeated header handling
mailinfo: be more liberal with header whitespace
mailinfo: simplify parsing of header values
mailinfo: treat header values as C strings
"git config" learned to show in which "scope", in addition to in
which file, each config setting comes from.
* mr/show-config-scope:
config: add '--show-scope' to print the scope of a config value
submodule-config: add subomdule config scope
config: teach git_config_source to remember its scope
config: preserve scope in do_git_config_sequence
config: clarify meaning of command line scoping
config: split repo scope to local and worktree
config: make scope_name non-static and rename it
t1300: create custom config file without special characters
t1300: fix over-indented HERE-DOCs
config: fix typo in variable name
Preparation for SHA-256 migration continues.
* bc/hash-independent-tests-part-8: (21 commits)
t6024: update for SHA-256
t6006: make hash size independent
t6000: abstract away SHA-1-specific constants
t5703: make test work with SHA-256
t5607: make hash size independent
t5318: update for SHA-256
t5515: make test hash independent
t5321: make test hash independent
t5313: make test hash independent
t5309: make test hash independent
t5302: make hash size independent
t4060: make test work with SHA-256
t4211: add test cases for SHA-256
t4211: move SHA-1-specific test cases into a directory
t4013: make test hash independent
t3311: make test work with SHA-256
t3310: make test work with SHA-256
t3309: make test work with SHA-256
t3308: make test work with SHA-256
t3206: make hash size independent
...
Memory footprint and performance of "git name-rev" has been
improved.
* rs/name-rev-memsave:
name-rev: sort tip names before applying
name-rev: release unused name strings
name-rev: generate name strings only if they are better
name-rev: pre-size buffer in get_parent_name()
name-rev: factor out get_parent_name()
name-rev: put struct rev_name into commit slab
name-rev: don't _peek() in create_or_update_name()
name-rev: don't leak path copy in name_ref()
name-rev: respect const qualifier
name-rev: remove unused typedef
name-rev: rewrite create_or_update_name()
In d9c6469 (git-gui: update status bar to track operations, 2019-12-01),
the status bar was refactored to allow multiple overlapping operations.
Since the refactor changed the status bar interface, all callsites had
to be refactored to use the new interface. During that refactoring, this
closing bracket was missed. This leads to an error message popping up
when doing 'Branch->Reset...'.
Signed-off-by: Pratyush Yadav <me@yadavpratyush.com>
Update the German translation and extend glossary.
* cs/german-translation:
git-gui: update German translation
git-gui: extend translation glossary template with more terms
git-gui: update pot template and German translation to current source code
Update German translation (glossary and final translation) with
recent additions, but also switch several terms from uncommon
translations back to English vocabulary.
This most prominently concerns "commit" (noun, verb), "repository",
"branch", and some more. These uncommon translations have been introduced
long ago and never been changed since. In fact, the whole German
translation here hasn't been touched for a long time. However, in German
literature and magazines, git-gui is regularly noted for its uncommon
choice of translated vocabulary. This somewhat distracts from the actual
benefits of this tool. So it is probably better to abandon the uncommon
translations and rather stick to the common English vocabulary in git
version control.
Signed-off-by: Christian Stimming <christian@cstimming.de>
Signed-off-by: Pratyush Yadav <me@yadavpratyush.com>
The English glossary template was missing some terms, some of them
not only for git-gui, but also gitk and/or git core. Many such terms
have been added.
Also, the list has been sorted alphabetically so that comparison to
other glossary lists are easier.
Signed-off-by: Christian Stimming <christian@cstimming.de>
Signed-off-by: Pratyush Yadav <me@yadavpratyush.com>
No content changes so far, only the preparation for subsequent edits.
Signed-off-by: Christian Stimming <christian@cstimming.de>
Signed-off-by: Pratyush Yadav <me@yadavpratyush.com>
Two related changes, with separate rationale for each:
Rename the 'interactive' backend to 'merge' because:
* 'interactive' as a name caused confusion; this backend has been used
for many kinds of non-interactive rebases, and will probably be used
in the future for more non-interactive rebases than interactive ones
given that we are making it the default.
* 'interactive' is not the underlying strategy; merging is.
* the directory where state is stored is not called
.git/rebase-interactive but .git/rebase-merge.
Rename the 'am' backend to 'apply' because:
* Few users are familiar with git-am as a reference point.
* Related to the above, the name 'am' makes sentences in the
documentation harder for users to read and comprehend (they may read
it as the verb from "I am"); avoiding this difficult places a large
burden on anyone writing documentation about this backend to be very
careful with quoting and sentence structure and often forces
annoying redundancy to try to avoid such problems.
* Users stumble over pronunciation ("am" as in "I am a person not a
backend" or "am" as in "the first and thirteenth letters in the
alphabet in order are "A-M"); this may drive confusion when one user
tries to explain to another what they are doing.
* While "am" is the tool driving this backend, the tool driving git-am
is git-apply, and since we are driving towards lower-level tools
for the naming of the merge backend we may as well do so here too.
* The directory where state is stored has never been called
.git/rebase-am, it was always called .git/rebase-apply.
For all the reasons listed above:
* Modify the documentation to refer to the backends with the new names
* Provide a brief note in the documentation connecting the new names
to the old names in case users run across the old names anywhere
(e.g. in old release notes or older versions of the documentation)
* Change the (new) --am command line flag to --apply
* Rename some enums, variables, and functions to reinforce the new
backend names for us as well.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
In order to ensure the merge/interactive backend gets similar coverage
to the am one, add some tests for cases where previously only the am
backend was tested.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
We have many rebase tests in the testsuite, and often the same test is
repeated multiple times just testing different backends. For those
tests that were specifically trying to test the am backend, add the --am
flag.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
A large variety of rebase types are supported by the interactive
machinery, not just the explicitly interactive ones. These all share
the same code and write the same reflog messages, but the "-i" moniker
in those messages doesn't really have much meaning. It also becomes
somewhat distracting once we switch the default from the am-backend to
the interactive one. Just remove the "-i" from these messages.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
In the past, we had different prompts for different types of rebases:
REBASE: for am-based rebases
REBASE-m: for merge-based rebases
REBASE-i: for interactive-based rebases
It's not clear why this distinction was necessary or helpful; when the
prompt was added in commit e75201963f ("Improve bash prompt to detect
various states like an unfinished merge", 2007-09-30), it simply added
these three different types. Perhaps there was a useful purpose back
then, but there have been some changes:
* The merge backend was deleted after being implemented on top of the
interactive backend, causing the prompt for merge-based rebases to
change from REBASE-m to REBASE-i.
* The interactive backend is used for multiple different types of
non-interactive rebases, so the "-i" part of the prompt doesn't
really mean what it used to.
* Rebase backends have gained more abilities and have a great deal of
overlap, sometimes making it hard to distinguish them.
* Behavioral differences between the backends have also been ironed
out.
* We want to change the default backend from am to interactive, which
means people would get "REBASE-i" by default if we didn't change
the prompt, and only if they specified --am or --whitespace or -C
would they get the "REBASE" prompt.
* In the future, we plan to have "--whitespace", "-C", and even "--am"
run the interactive backend once it can handle everything the
am-backend can.
For all these reasons, make the prompt for any type of rebase just be
"REBASE".
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Currently, this option doesn't do anything except error out if any
options requiring the interactive-backend are also passed. However,
when we make the default backend configurable later in this series, this
flag will provide a way to override the config setting.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
In the past, we dis-allowed rebases using the interactive backend from
performing a fast-forward to short-circuit the rebase operation. This
made sense for explicitly interactive rebases and some implicitly
interactive rebases, but certainly became overly stringent when the
merge backend was re-implemented via the interactive backend.
Just as the am-based rebase has always had to disable the fast-forward
based on a variety of conditions or flags (e.g. --signoff, --whitespace,
etc.), we need to do the same but now with a few more options. However,
continuing to use REBASE_FORCE for tracking this is problematic because
the interactive backend used it for a different purpose. (When
REBASE_FORCE wasn't set, the interactive backend would not fast-forward
the whole series but would fast-forward individual "pick" commits at the
beginning of the todo list, and then a squash or something would cause
it to start generating new commits.) So, introduce a new
allow_preemptive_ff flag contained within cmd_rebase() and use it to
track whether we are going to allow a pre-emptive fast-forward that
short-circuits the whole rebase.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
t3432 had several stress tests for can_fast_forward(), whose intent was
to ensure we were using the optimization of just fast forwarding when
possible. However, these tests verified that fast forwards had happened
based on the output that rebase printed to the terminal. We can instead
test more directly that we actually fast-forwarded by checking the
reflog, which also has the side effect of making the tests applicable
for the merge/interactive backend.
This change does lose the distinction between "noop" and "noop-force",
but as stated in commit c9efc21683 ("t3432: test for --no-ff's
interaction with fast-forward", 2019-08-27) which introduced that
distinction: "These tests aren't supposed to endorse the status quo,
just test for what we're currently doing.".
This change does not actually run these tests with the merge/interactive
backend; instead this is just a preparatory commit. A subsequent commit
which fixes can_fast_forward() to work with that backend will then also
change t3432 to add tests of that backend as well.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
restrict_revision in the original shell script was an excluded revision
range. It is also treated that way by the am-backend. In the
conversion from shell to C (see commit 6ab54d17be ("rebase -i:
implement the logic to initialize $revisions in C", 2018-08-28)), the
interactive-backend accidentally treated it as a positive revision
rather than a negated one.
This was missed as there were no tests in the testsuite that tested an
interactive rebase with fork-point behavior.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The GIT_QUIET environment variable was used to signal the non-am
backends that the rebase should perform quietly. The preserve-merges
backend does not make use of the quiet flag anywhere (other than to
write out its state whenever it writes state), and this mechanism was
broken in the conversion from shell to C. Since this environment
variable was specifically designed for scripts and the only backend that
would still use it is no longer a script, just gut this code.
A subsequent commit will fix --quiet for the interactive/merge backend
in a different way.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
When the merge backend was re-implemented on top of the interactive
backend, the output of rebase --merge changed a little. This change
allowed this test to be simplified, though it wasn't noticed until now.
Simplify the testcase a little.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
As established in the previous commit and commit b00bf1c9a8
(git-rebase: make --allow-empty-message the default, 2018-06-27), the
behavior for rebase with different backends in various edge or corner
cases is often more happenstance than design. This commit addresses
another such corner case: commits which "become empty".
A careful reader may note that there are two types of commits which would
become empty due to a rebase:
* [clean cherry-pick] Commits which are clean cherry-picks of upstream
commits, as determined by `git log --cherry-mark ...`. Re-applying
these commits would result in an empty set of changes and a
duplicative commit message; i.e. these are commits that have
"already been applied" upstream.
* [become empty] Commits which are not empty to start, are not clean
cherry-picks of upstream commits, but which still become empty after
being rebased. This happens e.g. when a commit has changes which
are a strict subset of the changes in an upstream commit, or when
the changes of a commit can be found spread across or among several
upstream commits.
Clearly, in both cases the changes in the commit in question are found
upstream already, but the commit message may not be in the latter case.
When cherry-mark can determine a commit is already upstream, then
because of how cherry-mark works this means the upstream commit message
was about the *exact* same set of changes. Thus, the commit messages
can be assumed to be fully interchangeable (and are in fact likely to be
completely identical). As such, the clean cherry-pick case represents a
case when there is no information to be gained by keeping the extra
commit around. All rebase types have always dropped these commits, and
no one to my knowledge has ever requested that we do otherwise.
For many of the become empty cases (and likely even most), we will also
be able to drop the commit without loss of information -- but this isn't
quite always the case. Since these commits represent cases that were
not clean cherry-picks, there is no upstream commit message explaining
the same set of changes. Projects with good commit message hygiene will
likely have the explanation from our commit message contained within or
spread among the relevant upstream commits, but not all projects run
that way. As such, the commit message of the commit being rebased may
have reasoning that suggests additional changes that should be made to
adapt to the new base, or it may have information that someone wants to
add as a note to another commit, or perhaps someone even wants to create
an empty commit with the commit message as-is.
Junio commented on the "become-empty" types of commits as follows[1]:
WRT a change that ends up being empty (as opposed to a change that
is empty from the beginning), I'd think that the current behaviour
is desireable one. "am" based rebase is solely to transplant an
existing history and want to stop much less than "interactive" one
whose purpose is to polish a series before making it publishable,
and asking for confirmation ("this has become empty--do you want to
drop it?") is more appropriate from the workflow point of view.
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/git/xmqqfu1fswdh.fsf@gitster-ct.c.googlers.com/
I would simply add that his arguments for "am"-based rebases actually
apply to all non-explicitly-interactive rebases. Also, since we are
stating that different cases should have different defaults, it may be
worth providing a flag to allow users to select which behavior they want
for these commits.
Introduce a new command line flag for selecting the desired behavior:
--empty={drop,keep,ask}
with the definitions:
drop: drop commits which become empty
keep: keep commits which become empty
ask: provide the user a chance to interact and pick what to do with
commits which become empty on a case-by-case basis
In line with Junio's suggestion, if the --empty flag is not specified,
pick defaults as follows:
explicitly interactive: ask
otherwise: drop
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Different rebase backends have different treatment for commits which
start empty (i.e. have no changes relative to their parent), and the
--keep-empty option was added at some point to allow adjusting behavior.
The handling of commits which start empty is actually quite similar to
commit b00bf1c9a8 (git-rebase: make --allow-empty-message the default,
2018-06-27), which pointed out that the behavior for various backends is
often more happenstance than design. The specific change made in that
commit is actually quite relevant as well and much of the logic there
directly applies here.
It makes a lot of sense in 'git commit' to error out on the creation of
empty commits, unless an override flag is provided. However, once
someone determines that there is a rare case that merits using the
manual override to create such a commit, it is somewhere between
annoying and harmful to have to take extra steps to keep such
intentional commits around. Granted, empty commits are quite rare,
which is why handling of them doesn't get considered much and folks tend
to defer to existing (accidental) behavior and assume there was a reason
for it, leading them to just add flags (--keep-empty in this case) that
allow them to override the bad defaults. Fix the interactive backend so
that --keep-empty is the default, much like we did with
--allow-empty-message. The am backend should also be fixed to have
--keep-empty semantics for commits that start empty, but that is not
included in this patch other than a testcase documenting the failure.
Note that there was one test in t3421 which appears to have been written
expecting --keep-empty to not be the default as correct behavior. This
test was introduced in commit 00b8be5a4d ("add tests for rebasing of
empty commits", 2013-06-06), which was part of a series focusing on
rebase topology and which had an interesting original cover letter at
https://lore.kernel.org/git/1347949878-12578-1-git-send-email-martinvonz@gmail.com/
which noted
Your input especially appreciated on whether you agree with the
intent of the test cases.
and then went into a long example about how one of the many tests added
had several questions about whether it was correct. As such, I believe
most the tests in that series were about testing rebase topology with as
many different flags as possible and were not trying to state in general
how those flags should behave otherwise.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
When developing a script, it can be painful to understand why Git thinks
something is outside the current repo, if the current repo isn't what
the user thinks it is. Since this can be tricky to diagnose, especially
in cases like submodules or nested worktrees, let's give the user a hint
about which repository is offended about that path.
Signed-off-by: Emily Shaffer <emilyshaffer@google.com>
Acked-by: brian m. carlson <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The details of how credential helpers can be called or implemented were
originally covered in Documentation/technical/. Those are topics that
end users might care about (and we even referenced them in the
credentials manpage), but those docs typically don't ship as part of the
end user documentation, making them less useful.
This situation got slightly worse recently in f3b9055624 (credential:
move doc to credential.h, 2019-11-17), where we moved them into the C
header file, making them even harder to find.
So let's move put this information into the gitcredentials(7)
documentation, which is meant to describe the overall concepts of our
credential handling. This was already pointing to the API docs for these
concepts, so we can just include it inline instead.
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The code to compute the commit-graph has been taught to use a more
robust way to tell if two object directories refer to the same
thing.
* tb/commit-graph-object-dir:
commit-graph.h: use odb in 'load_commit_graph_one_fd_st'
commit-graph.c: remove path normalization, comparison
commit-graph.h: store object directory in 'struct commit_graph'
commit-graph.h: store an odb in 'struct write_commit_graph_context'
t5318: don't pass non-object directory to '--object-dir'
The index-pack code now diagnoses a bad input packstream that
records the same object twice when it is used as delta base; the
code used to declare a software bug when encountering such an
input, but it is an input error.
* jk/index-pack-dupfix:
index-pack: downgrade twice-resolved REF_DELTA to die()
The code to automatically shrink the fan-out in the notes tree had
an off-by-one bug, which has been killed.
* jh/notes-fanout-fix:
notes.c: fix off-by-one error when decreasing notes fanout
t3305: check notes fanout more carefully and robustly
