The short-help text shown by "git cmd -h" and the synopsis text
shown at the beginning of "git help cmd" have been made more
consistent.
* ab/doc-synopsis-and-cmd-usage: (34 commits)
tests: assert consistent whitespace in -h output
tests: start asserting that *.txt SYNOPSIS matches -h output
doc txt & -h consistency: make "worktree" consistent
worktree: define subcommand -h in terms of command -h
reflog doc: list real subcommands up-front
doc txt & -h consistency: make "commit" consistent
doc txt & -h consistency: make "diff-tree" consistent
doc txt & -h consistency: use "[<label>...]" for "zero or more"
doc txt & -h consistency: make "annotate" consistent
doc txt & -h consistency: make "stash" consistent
doc txt & -h consistency: add missing options
doc txt & -h consistency: use "git foo" form, not "git-foo"
doc txt & -h consistency: make "bundle" consistent
doc txt & -h consistency: make "read-tree" consistent
doc txt & -h consistency: make "rerere" consistent
doc txt & -h consistency: add missing options and labels
doc txt & -h consistency: make output order consistent
doc txt & -h consistency: add or fix optional "--" syntax
doc txt & -h consistency: fix mismatching labels
doc SYNOPSIS & -h: use "-" to separate words in labels, not "_"
...
Correct uses of "<label>..." where we really meant to say
"[<label>...]", i.e. the command in question taken an optional set of
"<label>". As the CodingGuidelines notes "[o]ptional parts [should be]
enclosed in square brackets".
Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Fix various inconsistencies between command SYNOPSIS and the
corresponding -h output where our translatable labels didn't match
up.
In some cases we need to adjust the prose that follows the SYNOPSIS
accordingly, as it refers back to the changed label.
Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Add a CONFIGURATION section to the documentation of various built-ins,
for those cases where the relevant config/NAME.txt describes
configuration that is only used by the relevant built-in documented in
git-NAME.txt. Subsequent commits will handle more complex cases.
Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Matheus Tavares <matheus.bernardino@usp.br>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
"git clean" fixes.
* en/clean-nested-with-ignored:
dir: special case check for the possibility that pathspec is NULL
clean: fix theoretical path corruption
clean: rewrap overly long line
clean: avoid removing untracked files in a nested git repository
clean: disambiguate the definition of -d
git-clean.txt: do not claim we will delete files with -n/--dry-run
dir: add commentary explaining match_pathspec_item's return value
dir: if our pathspec might match files under a dir, recurse into it
dir: make the DO_MATCH_SUBMODULE code reusable for a non-submodule case
dir: also check directories for matching pathspecs
dir: fix off-by-one error in match_pathspec_item
dir: fix typo in comment
t7300: add testcases showing failure to clean specified pathspecs
Users expect files in a nested git repository to be left alone unless
sufficiently forced (with two -f's). Unfortunately, in certain
circumstances, git would delete both tracked (and possibly dirty) files
and untracked files within a nested repository. To explain how this
happens, let's contrast a couple cases. First, take the following
example setup (which assumes we are already within a git repo):
git init nested
cd nested
>tracked
git add tracked
git commit -m init
>untracked
cd ..
In this setup, everything works as expected; running 'git clean -fd'
will result in fill_directory() returning the following paths:
nested/
nested/tracked
nested/untracked
and then correct_untracked_entries() would notice this can be compressed
to
nested/
and then since "nested/" is a directory, we would call
remove_dirs("nested/", ...), which would
check is_nonbare_repository_dir() and then decide to skip it.
However, if someone also creates an ignored file:
>nested/ignored
then running 'git clean -fd' would result in fill_directory() returning
the same paths:
nested/
nested/tracked
nested/untracked
but correct_untracked_entries() will notice that we had ignored entries
under nested/ and thus simplify this list to
nested/tracked
nested/untracked
Since these are not directories, we do not call remove_dirs() which was
the only place that had the is_nonbare_repository_dir() safety check --
resulting in us deleting both the untracked file and the tracked (and
possibly dirty) file.
One possible fix for this issue would be walking the parent directories
of each path and checking if they represent nonbare repositories, but
that would be wasteful. Even if we added caching of some sort, it's
still a waste because we should have been able to check that "nested/"
represented a nonbare repository before even descending into it in the
first place. Add a DIR_SKIP_NESTED_GIT flag to dir_struct.flags and use
it to prevent fill_directory() and friends from descending into nested
git repos.
With this change, we also modify two regression tests added in commit
91479b9c72 ("t7300: add tests to document behavior of clean and nested
git", 2015-06-15). That commit, nor its series, nor the six previous
iterations of that series on the mailing list discussed why those tests
coded the expectation they did. In fact, it appears their purpose was
simply to test _existing_ behavior to make sure that the performance
changes didn't change the behavior. However, these two tests directly
contradicted the manpage's claims that two -f's were required to delete
files/directories under a nested git repository. While one could argue
that the user gave an explicit path which matched files/directories that
were within a nested repository, there's a slippery slope that becomes
very difficult for users to understand once you go down that route (e.g.
what if they specified "git clean -f -d '*.c'"?) It would also be hard
to explain what the exact behavior was; avoid such problems by making it
really simple.
Also, clean up some grammar errors describing this functionality in the
git-clean manpage.
Finally, there are still a couple bugs with -ffd not cleaning out enough
(e.g. missing the nested .git) and with -ffdX possibly cleaning out the
wrong files (paying attention to outer .gitignore instead of inner).
This patch does not address these cases at all (and does not change the
behavior relative to those flags), it only fixes the handling when given
a single -f. See
https://public-inbox.org/git/20190905212043.GC32087@szeder.dev/ for more
discussion of the -ffd[X?] bugs.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The -d flag pre-dated git-clean's ability to have paths specified. As
such, the default for git-clean was to only remove untracked files in
the current directory, and -d existed to allow it to recurse into
subdirectories.
The interaction of paths and the -d option appears to not have been
carefully considered, as evidenced by numerous bugs and a dearth of
tests covering such pairings in the testsuite. The definition turns out
to be important, so let's look at some of the various ways one could
interpret the -d option:
A) Without -d, only look in subdirectories which contain tracked
files under them; with -d, also look in subdirectories which
are untracked for files to clean.
B) Without specified paths from the user for us to delete, we need to
have some kind of default, so...without -d, only look in
subdirectories which contain tracked files under them; with -d,
also look in subdirectories which are untracked for files to clean.
The important distinction here is that choice B says that the presence
or absence of '-d' is irrelevant if paths are specified. The logic
behind option B is that if a user explicitly asked us to clean a
specified pathspec, then we should clean anything that matches that
pathspec. Some examples may clarify. Should
git clean -f untracked_dir/file
remove untracked_dir/file or not? It seems crazy not to, but a strict
reading of option A says it shouldn't be removed. How about
git clean -f untracked_dir/file1 tracked_dir/file2
or
git clean -f untracked_dir_1/file1 untracked_dir_2/file2
? Should it remove either or both of these files? Should it require
multiple runs to remove both the files listed? (If this sounds like a
crazy question to even ask, see the commit message of "t7300: Add some
testcases showing failure to clean specified pathspecs" added earlier in
this patch series.) What if -ffd were used instead of -f -- should that
allow these to be removed? Should it take multiple invocations with
-ffd? What if a glob (such as '*tracked*') were used instead of
spelling out the directory names? What if the filenames involved globs,
such as
git clean -f '*.o'
or
git clean -f '*/*.o'
?
The current documentation actually suggests a definition that is
slightly different than choice A, and the implementation prior to this
series provided something radically different than either choices A or
B. (The implementation, though, was clearly just buggy). There may be
other choices as well. However, for almost any given choice of
definition for -d that I can think of, some of the examples above will
appear buggy to the user. The only case that doesn't have negative
surprises is choice B: treat a user-specified path as a request to clean
all untracked files which match that path specification, including
recursing into any untracked directories.
Change the documentation and basic implementation to use this
definition.
There were two regression tests that indirectly depended on the current
implementation, but neither was about subdirectory handling. These two
tests were introduced in commit 5b7570cfb4 ("git-clean: add tests for
relative path", 2008-03-07) which was solely created to add coverage for
the changes in commit fb328947c8e ("git-clean: correct printing relative
path", 2008-03-07). Both tests specified a directory that happened to
have an untracked subdirectory, but both were only checking that the
resulting printout of a file that was removed was shown with a relative
path. Update these tests appropriately.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
It appears that the wrong option got included in the list of what will
cause git-clean to actually take action. Correct the list.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Two new commands "git switch" and "git restore" are introduced to
split "checking out a branch to work on advancing its history" and
"checking out paths out of the index and/or a tree-ish to work on
advancing the current history" out of the single "git checkout"
command.
* nd/switch-and-restore: (46 commits)
completion: disable dwim on "git switch -d"
switch: allow to switch in the middle of bisect
t2027: use test_must_be_empty
Declare both git-switch and git-restore experimental
help: move git-diff and git-reset to different groups
doc: promote "git restore"
user-manual.txt: prefer 'merge --abort' over 'reset --hard'
completion: support restore
t: add tests for restore
restore: support --patch
restore: replace --force with --ignore-unmerged
restore: default to --source=HEAD when only --staged is specified
restore: reject invalid combinations with --staged
restore: add --worktree and --staged
checkout: factor out worktree checkout code
restore: disable overlay mode by default
restore: make pathspec mandatory
restore: take tree-ish from --source option instead
checkout: split part of it to new command 'restore'
doc: promote "git switch"
...
The new command "git restore" (together with "git switch") are added
to avoid the confusion of one-command-do-all "git checkout" for new
users. They are also helpful to avoid ambiguous context.
For these reasons, promote it everywhere possible. This includes
documentation, suggestions/advice from other commands.
One nice thing about git-restore is the ability to restore
"everything", so it can be used in "git status" advice instead of both
"git checkout" and "git reset". The three commands suggested by "git
status" are add, rm and restore.
"git checkout" is also removed from "git help" (i.e. it's no longer
considered a commonly used command)
Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
In the git-clean documentation, -x and -e documented .gitignore,
$GIT_DIR/info/excludes but neglected to mention the file pointed to by
core.excludesFile.
Remove specific list of files and, instead, reference gitignore(5)
documentation so that information is consolidated and the git-clean
documentation is more precise.
Reported-by: Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@crashcourse.ca>
Helped-by: Martin Ågren <martin.agren@gmail.com>
Helped-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Signed-off-by: Denton Liu <liu.denton@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
It was common in our documentation to surround short option names with
forward quotes, which renders as italic in HTML. Instead, use backquotes
which renders as monospace. This is one more step toward conformance to
Documentation/CodingGuidelines.
This was obtained with:
perl -pi -e "s/'(-[a-z])'/\`\$1\`/g" *.txt
Signed-off-by: Matthieu Moy <Matthieu.Moy@imag.fr>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The latter half of this sentence, the removal of the submodules, was
never done with (or without) double -f back when it was written, and
we still do not do so.
Signed-off-by: Matt McCutchen <matt@mattmccutchen.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
This is needed in build automation where the tree really needs to
be reset to known state.
Signed-off-by: Mikko Rapeli <mikko.rapeli@iki.fi>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
In addition to fixing trivial and obvious typos, be careful about
the following points:
- Spell ASCII, URL and CRC in ALL CAPS;
- Spell Linux as Capitalized;
- Do not omit periods in "i.e." and "e.g.".
Signed-off-by: Thomas Ackermann <th.acker@arcor.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The descriptions of "select by numbers" section for interactive
git-clean are borrowed from git-add, and one sentence should be
replaced.
Signed-off-by: Jiang Xin <worldhello.net@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Add new section "Interactive mode" for documentation of interactive
git-clean.
Signed-off-by: Jiang Xin <worldhello.net@gmail.com>
Helped-by: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Show what would be done and the user must confirm before actually
cleaning.
Would remove ...
Would remove ...
Would remove ...
Remove [y/n]?
Press "y" to start cleaning, and press "n" if you want to abort.
Signed-off-by: Jiang Xin <worldhello.net@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
'git clean' is controlled by gitignore. Provide See Also link for it.
Use of core.excludesfile is implied.
Signed-off-by: Philip Oakley <philipoakley@iee.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The current explanation of -e can be misread as allowing the user to say
I know 'git clean -XYZ' (substitute -XYZ with any option and/or
parameter) will remove paths A, B, and C, and I want them all removed
except for paths matching this pattern by adding '-e C' to the same
command line, i.e. 'git clean -e C -XYZ'.
But that is not what this option does. It augments the set of ignore rules
from the command line, just like the same "-e <pattern>" argument does
with the "ls-files" command (the user could probably pass "-e \!C" to tell
the command to clean everything the command would normally remove, except
for C). Also error out when both -x and -e are given with an explanation of
what -e means---it is a symptom of misunderstanding what -e does.
It also fixes small style nit in the parameter to add_exclude() call. The
current code only works because EXC_CMDL happens to be defined as 0.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The point of these sections is generally to:
1. Give credit where it is due.
2. Give the reader an idea of where to ask questions or
file bug reports.
But they don't do a good job of either case. For (1), they
are out of date and incomplete. A much more accurate answer
can be gotten through shortlog or blame. For (2), the
correct contact point is generally git@vger, and even if you
wanted to cc the contact point, the out-of-date and
incomplete fields mean you're likely sending to somebody
useless.
So let's drop the fields entirely from all manpages except
git(1) itself. We already point people to the mailing list
for bug reports there, and we can update the Authors section
to give credit to the major contributors and point to
shortlog and blame for more information.
Each page has a "This is part of git" footer, so people can
follow that to the main git manpage.
With the -e/--exclude option for git-clean, a user can specify files
that they haven't yet told git about, but either need for a short amount
of time or plan to tell git about them later. This allows one to still
use git-clean while these files are around without losing data.
Signed-off-by: Jared Hance <jaredhance@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Currently, when called without -n and -f, git clean issues
fatal: clean.requireForce not set and -n or -f not given; refusing to clean
which leaves the user wondering why force is required when requireForce
is not set. Looking up in git-clean(1) does not help because its
description is wrong.
Change it so that git clean issues
fatal: clean.requireForce defaults to true and -n or -f not given; refusing to clean
in this situation (and "...set to true..." when it is set) which makes
it clearer that an unset config means true here, and adjust the
documentation.
Signed-off-by: Michael J Gruber <git@drmicha.warpmail.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The documentation was quite inconsistent when spelling 'git cmd' if it
only refers to the program, not to some specific invocation syntax:
both 'git-cmd' and 'git cmd' spellings exist.
The current trend goes towards dashless forms, and there is precedent
in 647ac70 (git-svn.txt: stop using dash-form of commands.,
2009-07-07) to actively eliminate the dashed variants.
Replace 'git-cmd' with 'git cmd' throughout, except where git-shell,
git-cvsserver, git-upload-pack, git-receive-pack, and
git-upload-archive are concerned, because those really live in the
$PATH.
git branch, checkout, clean, mv and tag all have an option -f to override
certain checks. This patch makes them accept the long option --force as
a synonym.
While we're at it, document that checkout support --quiet as synonym for
its short option -q.
Signed-off-by: Rene Scharfe <rene.scharfe@lsrfire.ath.cx>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
When you have an embedded git work tree in your work tree (be it
an orphaned submodule, or an independent checkout of an unrelated
project), "git clean -d -f" blindly descended into it and removed
everything. This is rarely what the user wants.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Fredrik Skolmli and Thomas Rast noticed that it was left unstated that
"git clean" ran from a subdirectory will not affect anything outside it,
with or without path limiters.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The existing text is a little bit awkward. This rewrites the description
section to be more readable and friendly.
Signed-off-by: Wesley J. Landaker <wjl@icecavern.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
There were a few minor grammatical errors that made this paragraph hard
to read. This patch fixes the errors in a very minimal manner.
Signed-off-by: Wesley J. Landaker <wjl@icecavern.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
When the SYNOPSIS says e.g. "<path>...", it is nice if the DESCRIPTION
also mentions "<path>..." and says the specified "paths" (note plural)
are used for $whatever. This fixes the obvious mismatches.
Signed-off-by: Abhijit Menon-Sen <ams@toroid.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The names of git commands are not meant to be entered at the
commandline; they are just names. So we render them in italics,
as is usual for command names in manpages.
Using
doit () {
perl -e 'for (<>) { s/\`(git-[^\`.]*)\`/'\''\1'\''/g; print }'
}
for i in git*.txt config.txt diff*.txt blame*.txt fetch*.txt i18n.txt \
merge*.txt pretty*.txt pull*.txt rev*.txt urls*.txt
do
doit <"$i" >"$i+" && mv "$i+" "$i"
done
git diff
.
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@uchicago.edu>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Following what appears to be the predominant style, format
names of commands and commandlines both as `teletype text`.
While we're at it, add articles ("a" and "the") in some
places, italicize the name of the command in the manual page
synopsis line, and add a comma or two where it seems appropriate.
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@uchicago.edu>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Since the git-* commands are not installed in $(bindir), using
"git-command <parameters>" in examples in the documentation is
not a good idea. On the other hand, it is nice to be able to
refer to each command using one hyphenated word. (There is no
escaping it, anyway: man page names cannot have spaces in them.)
This patch retains the dash in naming an operation, command,
program, process, or action. Complete command lines that can
be entered at a shell (i.e., without options omitted) are
made to use the dashless form.
The changes consist only of replacing some spaces with hyphens
and vice versa. After a "s/ /-/g", the unpatched and patched
versions are identical.
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@uchicago.edu>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
As the "git" man page describes the "git" command at the end-user
level, it seems better to move it to man section 1.
Signed-off-by: Christian Couder <chriscool@tuxfamily.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Between AsciiDoc 8.2.2 and 8.2.3, the following change was made to the stock
Asciidoc configuration:
@@ -149,7 +153,10 @@
# Inline macros.
# Backslash prefix required for escape processing.
# (?s) re flag for line spanning.
-(?su)[\\]?(?P<name>\w(\w|-)*?):(?P<target>\S*?)(\[(?P<attrlist>.*?)\])=
+
+# Explicit so they can be nested.
+(?su)[\\]?(?P<name>(http|https|ftp|file|mailto|callto|image|link)):(?P<target>\S*?)(\[(?P<attrlist>.*?)\])=
+
# Anchor: [[[id]]]. Bibliographic anchor.
(?su)[\\]?\[\[\[(?P<attrlist>[\w][\w-]*?)\]\]\]=anchor3
# Anchor: [[id,xreflabel]]
This default regex now matches explicit values, and unfortunately in this
case gitlink was being matched by just 'link', causing the wrong inline
macro template to be applied. By renaming the macro, we can avoid being
matched by the wrong regex.
Signed-off-by: Dan McGee <dpmcgee@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
- git-ls-files.txt: typo in description of --ignored
- git-clean.txt: s/forceRequire/requireForce/
Signed-off-by: Michael Spang <mspang@uwaterloo.ca>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Add a new configuration option clean.requireForce. If set, git-clean will
refuse to run, unless forced with the new -f option, or not acting due to -n.
Signed-off-by: Josh Triplett <josh@freedesktop.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
When optional paths arguments are given, git-clean passes them
to underlying git-ls-files; with this, you can say:
git clean 'temp-*'
to clean only the garbage files whose names begin with 'temp-'.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Signed-off-by: Pavel Roskin <proski@gnu.org>
This command removes untracked files from the working tree. This
implementation is based on cg-clean with some simplifications. The
documentation is included.
[jc: with trivial documentation fix, noticed by Jakub Narebski]
Signed-off-by: Pavel Roskin <proski@gnu.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
