This test is pretty old and did not follow some of our more
modern best practices. In particular:
1. It chdir'd all over the place, leaving later tests to
deal with the fallout. Do our chdirs in subshells
instead.
2. It did not use test_must_fail.
3. It did not use test_line_count.
4. It checked for the non-existence of a ref by looking in the
.git/refs directory (since we pack refs during clone
these days, this will always be succeed, making the
test useless).
Note that one call to "-e .git/refs/..." remains,
because it is checking for the existence of a symbolic
ref, not a ref itself.
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Since 86ac751 (Allow cloning an empty repository,
2009-01-23), doing:
git clone does-not-exist
has created does-not-exist as an empty repository. This was
an unintentional side effect of 86ac751. Even weirder,
doing:
git clone does-not-exist new-dir
_does_ fail, making this "feature" (if you want to consider
it such) broken. Let's detect this situation and explicitly
die. It's almost certainly not what the user intended.
This patch also adds two tests. One for the missing path
case, and one to confirm that a similar case, cloning a
non-repository directory, fails.
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Same rules as before: this patch only adds " &&" to the end of
some lines in the test suite.
Intended to be applied on top of or squashed with the last
batch if they look okay.
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
This makes git-push refuse pushing into a non-bare repository to update
the current branch by default. To help people who are used to be able to
do this (and later "reset --hard" it in some other way), an error message
is issued when this refusal is triggered, instructing how to resurrect the
old behaviour.
Hosting sites that do not give the users direct access to customize their
repositories (e.g. repo.or.cz, gitorious, github etc.) may further want to
explicitly set the configuration variable to "refuse" for their customers'
repositories.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
A test might happen to be the last one in the script, but other people
later may want to add more tests after your test is done.
Do not surprise them by going in a subdirectory to run a part of your test
and never coming out of it. This fixes a162e78 in that respect.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Commit 55f0566 (get_local_heads(): do not return random pointer if
there is no head, 2009-04-17) fixed a segfault for git push, this
patch adds a test-case to avoid future regressions.
Signed-off-by: Matthieu Moy <Matthieu.Moy@imag.fr>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Cloning an empty repository manually (that is, doing 'git init' and
then doing all configuration by hand) can be a lot of work. Save the
user this work by allowing the cloning of empty repositories.
Signed-off-by: Sverre Rabbelier <srabbelier@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
"git bundle create x master master" used to create a bundle that lists
the same branch (master) twice. Cloning from such a bundle resulted in
a needless warning "warning: Duplicated ref: refs/remotes/origin/master".
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
When HEAD is detached, --all should list it, too, logically, as a
detached HEAD is by definition a temporary, unnamed branch.
It is especially necessary to list it when garbage collecting, as
the detached HEAD would be trashed.
Noticed by Thomas Rast.
Note that this affects creating bundles with --all; I contend that it
is a good change to add the HEAD, so that cloning from such a bundle
will give you a current branch. However, I had to fix t5701 as it
assumed that --all does not imply HEAD.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The "humanish" part of a bundle is made removing the ".bundle" suffix.
Signed-off-by: Santi Béjar <sbejar@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
When cloning a remote repository which's HEAD refers to a nonexistent
ref, git-clone cloned all existing refs, but failed to write the
configuration for 'remote'. Now it detects the dangling remote HEAD,
refuses to checkout any local branch since HEAD refers to nowhere, but
properly writes the configuration for 'remote', so that subsequent
'git fetch's don't fail.
The problem was reported by Daniel Jacobowitz through
http://bugs.debian.org/466581
Signed-off-by: Gerrit Pape <pape@smarden.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
This changes the behaviour of cloning from a repository on the
local machine, by defaulting to "-l" (use hardlinks to share
files under .git/objects) and making "-l" a no-op. A new
option, --no-hardlinks, is also added to cause file-level copy
of files under .git/objects while still avoiding the normal
"pack to pipe, then receive and index pack" network transfer
overhead. The old behaviour of local cloning without -l nor -s
is availble by specifying the source repository with the newly
introduced file:///path/to/repo.git/ syntax (i.e. "same as
network" cloning).
* With --no-hardlinks (i.e. have all .git/objects/ copied via
cpio) would not catch the source repository corruption, and
also risks corrupted recipient repository if an
alpha-particle hits memory cell while indexing and resolving
deltas. As long as the recipient is created uncorrupted, you
have a good back-up.
* same-as-network is expensive, but it would catch the breakage
of the source repository. It still risks corrupted recipient
repository due to hardware failure. As long as the recipient
is created uncorrupted, you have a good back-up.
* The new default on the same filesystem, as long as the source
repository is healthy, it is very likely that the recipient
would be, too. Also it is very cheap. You do not get any
back-up benefit, though.
None of the method is resilient against the source repository
corruption, so let's discount that from the comparison. Then
the difference with and without --no-hardlinks matters primarily
if you value the back-up benefit or not. If you want to use the
cloned repository as a back-up, then it is cheaper to do a clone
with --no-hardlinks and two git-fsck (source before clone,
recipient after clone) than same-as-network clone, especially as
you are likely to do a git-fsck on the recipient if you are so
paranoid anyway.
Which leads me to believe that being able to use file:/// is
probably a good idea, if only for testability, but probably of
little practical value. We default to hardlinked clone for
everyday use, and paranoids can use --no-hardlinks as a way to
make a back-up.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The problem is visible when cloning a local repo. The cloned
repository will have the origin url setup incorrectly: the origin name
will be copied verbatim in origin url of the cloned repository.
Normally, the name is to be expanded into absolute path.
Signed-off-by: Alex Riesen <raa.lkml@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
