When creating a pack-file using 'git pack-objects --revs' we provide
a list of interesting and uninteresting commits. For example, a push
operation would make the local topic branch be interesting and the
known remote refs as uninteresting. We want to discover the set of
new objects to send to the server as a thin pack.
We walk these commits until we discover a frontier of commits such
that every commit walk starting at interesting commits ends in a root
commit or unintersting commit. We then need to discover which
non-commit objects are reachable from uninteresting commits. This
commit walk is not changing during this series.
The mark_edges_uninteresting() method in list-objects.c iterates on
the commit list and does the following:
* If the commit is UNINTERSTING, then mark its root tree and every
object it can reach as UNINTERESTING.
* If the commit is interesting, then mark the root tree of every
UNINTERSTING parent (and all objects that tree can reach) as
UNINTERSTING.
At the very end, we repeat the process on every commit directly
given to the revision walk from stdin. This helps ensure we properly
cover shallow commits that otherwise were not included in the
frontier.
The logic to recursively follow trees is in the
mark_tree_uninteresting() method in revision.c. The algorithm avoids
duplicate work by not recursing into trees that are already marked
UNINTERSTING.
Add a new 'sparse' option to the mark_edges_uninteresting() method
that performs this logic in a slightly different way. As we iterate
over the commits, we add all of the root trees to an oidset. Then,
call mark_trees_uninteresting_sparse() on that oidset. Note that we
include interesting trees in this process. The current implementation
of mark_trees_unintersting_sparse() will walk the same trees as
the old logic, but this will be replaced in a later change.
Add a '--sparse' flag in 'git pack-objects' to call this new logic.
Add a new test script t/t5322-pack-objects-sparse.sh that tests this
option. The tests currently demonstrate that the resulting object
list is the same as the old algorithm. This includes a case where
both algorithms pack an object that is not needed by a remote due to
limits on the explored set of trees. When the sparse algorithm is
changed in a later commit, we will add a test that demonstrates a
change of behavior in some cases.
Signed-off-by: Derrick Stolee <dstolee@microsoft.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
In preparation for a new algorithm that walks fewer trees when
creating a pack from a set of revisions, create a method that
takes an oidset of tree oids and marks reachable objects as
UNINTERESTING.
The current implementation uses the existing
mark_tree_uninteresting to recursively walk the trees and blobs.
This will walk the same number of trees as the old mechanism. To
ensure that mark_tree_uninteresting walks the tree, we need to
remove the UNINTERESTING flag before calling the method. This
implementation will be replaced entirely in a later commit.
There is one new assumption in this approach: we are also given
the oids of the interesting trees. This implementation does not
use those trees at the moment, but we will use them in a later
rewrite of this method.
Signed-off-by: Derrick Stolee <dstolee@microsoft.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The text body of section Behavioral Differences is typeset as code,
but should be regular text. Remove the indentation to achieve that.
While here, prettify the language:
- use "the x backend" instead of "x-based rebase";
- use present tense instead of future tense;
and use subsections instead of a list.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Sixt <j6t@kdbg.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
We have three double-quote characters, which is one too many or too few.
Dropping the last one seems to match the original intention best.
Signed-off-by: Martin Ågren <martin.agren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
I had to read this sentence a few times to understand it. Let's try to
clarify it.
Signed-off-by: Martin Ågren <martin.agren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Some items that should be in "Performance, Internal Implementation,
Development Support etc." have ended up in "UI, Workflows & Features"
and "Fixes since v2.19". Move them, and do s/uses/use/ while at it.
Signed-off-by: Martin Ågren <martin.agren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Commit d8981c3f88 ("format-patch: do not let its diff-options affect
--range-diff", 2018-11-30) taught `show_range_diff()` to accept a
NULL-pointer as an indication that it should use its own "reasonable
default". That fixed a regression from a5170794 ("Merge branch
'ab/range-diff-no-patch'", 2018-11-18), but unfortunately it introduced
a regression of its own.
In particular, it means we forget the `file` member of the diff options,
so rather than placing a range-diff in the cover-letter, we write it to
stdout. In order to fix this, rewrite the two callers adjusted by
d8981c3f88 to instead create a "dummy" set of diff options where they
only fill in the fields we absolutely require, such as output file and
color.
Modify and extend the existing tests to try and verify that the right
contents end up in the right place.
Don't revert `show_range_diff()`, i.e., let it keep accepting NULL.
Rather than removing what is dead code and figuring out it isn't
actually dead and we've broken 2.20, just leave it for now.
[es: retain diff coloring when going to stdout]
Signed-off-by: Martin Ågren <martin.agren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
"git diff --raw" lost ellipses to adjust the output columns for
some time now, but the documentation still showed them.
* gh/diff-raw-has-no-ellipses:
doc: update diff-format.txt for removed ellipses in --raw
test framework has been updated to make a bug in the test script
(as opposed to bugs in Git that are discovered by running the
tests) stand out more prominently.
* sg/test-BUG:
tests: send "bug in the test script" errors to the script's stderr
An error message that sugggests how to give correct arguments to
"git push" has been updated.
* ab/push-example-in-doc:
push: change needlessly ambiguous example in error
The advice message to tell the user to migrate an existing graft
file to the replace system when a graft file was read was shown
even when "git replace --convert-graft-file" command, which is the
way the message suggests to use, was running, which made little
sense.
* ab/replace-graft-with-replace-advice:
advice: don't pointlessly suggest --convert-graft-file
"git rebase --stat" to transplant a piece of history onto a totally
unrelated history were not working before and silently showed wrong
result. With the recent reimplementation in C, it started to instead
die with an error message, as the original logic was not prepared
to cope with this case. This has now been fixed.
* js/rebase-stat-unrelated-fix:
rebase --stat: fix when rebasing to an unrelated history
"git rebase" reimplemented recently in C accidentally changed the
way reflog entries are recorded (earlier "rebase -i" identified the
entries it leaves with "rebase -i", but the new version always
marks them with "rebase"). This has been corrected.
* js/rebase-reflog-action-fix:
rebase: fix GIT_REFLOG_ACTION regression
"git format-patch --range-diff" by mistake passed the diff options
used to generate the primary output of the command to the
range-diff machinery, which caused the range-diff in the cover
letter to include fairly useless "--stat" output. This has been
corrected by forcing a non-customizable default formatting options
on the range-diff machinery when driven by format-patch.
* jc/format-patch-range-diff-fix:
format-patch: do not let its diff-options affect --range-diff
The whitespace breakages in these messages were introduced while
reimplementing the subcommand in C. Match these messages to those
in the original scripted version.
Signed-off-by: Ralf Thielow <ralf.thielow@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
When rebasing to a commit history that has no common commits with the
current branch, there is no merge base. In diffstat mode, this means
that we cannot compare to the merge base, but we have to compare to the
empty tree instead.
Also, if running in verbose diffstat mode, we should not output
Changes from <merge-base> to <onto>
as that does not make sense without any merge base.
Note: neither scripted nor built-in versoin of `git rebase` were
prepared for this situation well. We use this opportunity not only to
fix the bug(s), but also to make both versions' output consistent in
this instance. And add a regression test to keep this working in all
eternity.
Reported-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The scripted version of "rebase" honored the `GIT_REFLOG_ACTION`,
and some automation scripts expected the reflog entries to be
prefixed with "rebase -i", not "rebase", after running "rebase -i".
This regressed in the reimplementation in C.
Fix that, and add a regression test, both with `GIT_REFLOG_ACTION`
set and unset.
Note: the reflog message for "rebase finished" did *not* honor
GIT_REFLOG_ACTION, and as we are very late in the v2.20.0-rcN phase,
we leave that bug for later (as it seems that that bug has been with
us from the very beginning).
Reported by Ian Jackson.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
