The GETTEXT_POISON=YesPlease compile-time testing option added in my
bb946bba76 ("i18n: add GETTEXT_POISON to simulate unfriendly
translator", 2011-02-22) has been slowly bitrotting as strings have
been marked for translation, and new tests have been added without
running it.
I brought this up on the list ("[BUG] test suite broken with
GETTEXT_POISON=YesPlease", [1]) asking whether this mode was useful at
all anymore. At least one person occasionally uses it, and Lars
Schneider offered to change one of the the Travis builds to run in
this mode, so fix up the failing ones.
My test setup runs most of the tests, with the notable exception of
skipping all the p4 tests, so it's possible that there's still some
lurking regressions I haven't fixed.
1. <CACBZZX62+acvi1dpkknadTL827mtCm_QesGSZ=6+UnyeMpg8+Q@mail.gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
"git tag/branch/for-each-ref" family of commands long allowed to
filter the refs by "--contains X" (show only the refs that are
descendants of X), "--merged X" (show only the refs that are
ancestors of X), "--no-merged X" (show only the refs that are not
ancestors of X). One curious omission, "--no-contains X" (show
only the refs that are not descendants of X) has been added to
them.
* ab/ref-filter-no-contains:
tag: add tests for --with and --without
ref-filter: reflow recently changed branch/tag/for-each-ref docs
ref-filter: add --no-contains option to tag/branch/for-each-ref
tag: change --point-at to default to HEAD
tag: implicitly supply --list given another list-like option
tag: change misleading --list <pattern> documentation
parse-options: add OPT_NONEG to the "contains" option
tag: add more incompatibles mode tests
for-each-ref: partly change <object> to <commit> in help
tag tests: fix a typo in a test description
tag: remove a TODO item from the test suite
ref-filter: add test for --contains on a non-commit
ref-filter: make combining --merged & --no-merged an error
tag doc: reword --[no-]merged to talk about commits, not tips
tag doc: split up the --[no-]merged documentation
tag doc: move the description of --[no-]merged earlier
A few unterminated here documents in tests were fixed, which in
turn revealed incorrect expectations the tests make. These tests
have been updated.
* st/verify-tag:
t7004, t7030: fix here-doc syntax errors
Change the test suite to test for these synonyms for --contains and
--no-contains, respectively.
Before this change there were no tests for them at all. This doesn't
exhaustively test for them as well as their --contains and
--no-contains synonyms, but at least it's something.
Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Change the tag, branch & for-each-ref commands to have a --no-contains
option in addition to their longstanding --contains options.
This allows for finding the last-good rollout tag given a known-bad
<commit>. Given a hypothetically bad commit cf5c7253e0, the git
version to revert to can be found with this hacky two-liner:
(git tag -l 'v[0-9]*'; git tag -l --contains cf5c7253e0 'v[0-9]*') |
sort | uniq -c | grep -E '^ *1 ' | awk '{print $2}' | tail -n 10
With this new --no-contains option the same can be achieved with:
git tag -l --no-contains cf5c7253e0 'v[0-9]*' | sort | tail -n 10
As the filtering machinery is shared between the tag, branch &
for-each-ref commands, implement this for those commands too. A
practical use for this with "branch" is e.g. finding branches which
were branched off between v2.8.0 and v2.10.0:
git branch --contains v2.8.0 --no-contains v2.10.0
The "describe" command also has a --contains option, but its semantics
are unrelated to what tag/branch/for-each-ref use --contains for. A
--no-contains option for "describe" wouldn't make any sense, other
than being exactly equivalent to not supplying --contains at all,
which would be confusing at best.
Add a --without option to "tag" as an alias for --no-contains, for
consistency with --with and --contains. The --with option is
undocumented, and possibly the only user of it is
Junio (<xmqqefy71iej.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>). But it's
trivial to support, so let's do that.
The additions to the the test suite are inverse copies of the
corresponding --contains tests. With this change --no-contains for
tag, branch & for-each-ref is just as well tested as the existing
--contains option.
In addition to those tests, add a test for "tag" which asserts that
--no-contains won't find tree/blob tags, which is slightly
unintuitive, but consistent with how --contains works & is documented.
Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Change the --points-at option to default to HEAD for consistency with
its siblings --contains, --merged etc. which default to
HEAD. Previously we'd get:
$ git tag --points-at 2>&1 | head -n 1
error: option `points-at' requires a value
This changes behavior added in commit ae7706b9ac (tag: add --points-at
list option, 2012-02-08).
Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Change the "tag" command to implicitly turn on its --list mode when
provided with a list-like option such as --contains, --points-at etc.
This is for consistency with how "branch" works. When "branch" is
given a list-like option, such as --contains, it implicitly provides
--list. Before this change "tag" would error out on those sorts of
invocations. I.e. while both of these worked for "branch":
git branch --contains v2.8.0 <pattern>
git branch --list --contains v2.8.0 <pattern>
Only the latter form worked for "tag":
git tag --contains v2.8.0 '*rc*'
git tag --list --contains v2.8.0 '*rc*'
Now "tag", like "branch", will implicitly supply --list when a
list-like option is provided, and no other conflicting non-list
options (such as -d) are present on the command-line.
Spelunking through the history via:
git log --reverse -p -G'only allowed with' -- '*builtin*tag*c'
Reveals that there was no good reason for not allowing this in the
first place. The --contains option added in 32c35cfb1e ("git-tag: Add
--contains option", 2009-01-26) made this an error. All the other
subsequent list-like options that were added copied its pattern of
making this usage an error.
The only tests that break as a result of this change are tests that
were explicitly checking that this "branch-like" usage wasn't
permitted. Change those failing tests to check that this invocation
mode is permitted, add extra tests for the list-like options we
weren't testing, and tests to ensure that e.g. we don't toggle the
list mode in the presence of other conflicting non-list options.
With this change errors messages such as "--contains option is only
allowed with -l" don't make sense anymore, since options like
--contain turn on -l. Instead we error out when list-like options such
as --contain are used in conjunction with conflicting options such as
-d or -v.
Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Change the documentation for --list so that it's described as a
toggle, not as an option that takes a <pattern> as an argument.
Junio initially documented this in b867c7c23a ("git-tag: -l to list
tags (usability).", 2006-02-17), but later Jeff King changed "tag" to
accept multiple patterns in 588d0e834b ("tag: accept multiple patterns
for --list", 2011-06-20).
However, documenting this as "-l <pattern>" was never correct, as
these both worked before Jeff's change:
git tag -l 'v*'
git tag 'v*' -l
One would expect an option that was documented like that to only
accept:
git tag --list
git tag --list 'v*rc*'
And after Jeff's change, one that took multiple patterns:
git tag --list 'v*rc*' --list '*2.8*'
But since it's actually a toggle all of these work as well, and
produce identical output to the last example above:
git tag --list 'v*rc*' '*2.8*'
git tag --list 'v*rc*' '*2.8*' --list --list --list
git tag --list 'v*rc*' '*2.8*' --list -l --list -l --list
Now the documentation is more in tune with how the "branch" command
describes its --list option since commit cddd127b9a ("branch:
introduce --list option", 2011-08-28).
Change the test suite to assert that these invocations work for the
cases that weren't already being tested for.
Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Amend the test suite to test for more invalid uses like "-l -a"
etc.
This change tests the code path in builtin/tag.c between lines:
if (argc == 0 && !cmdmode)
And:
if ((create_tag_object || force) && (cmdmode != 0))
Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Jan Palus noticed that some here-doc are spelled incorrectly,
resulting the entire remainder of the test snippet being slurped
into the "expect" file as if it were data, e.g. in this sequence
cat >expect <<EOF &&
... expectation ...
EOF
git $cmd_being_tested >actual &&
test_cmp expect actual
the last command of the test is "cat" that sends everything to
'expect' and succeeds.
Fixing these issues in t7004 and t7030 reveals that "git tag -v"
and "git verify-tag" with their --format option do not work as the
test was expecting originally. Instead of showing both valid tags
and tags with incorrect signatures on their output, tags that do not
pass verification are omitted from the output. Another breakage that
is uncovered is that these tests must be restricted to environment
where gpg is available.
Arguably, that is a safer behaviour, and because the format
specifiers like %(tag) do not have a way to show if the signature
verifies correctly, the command with the --format option cannot be
used to get a list of tags annotated with their signature validity
anyway.
For now, let's fix the here-doc syntax, update the expectation to
match the reality, and update the test prerequisite.
Maybe later when we extend the --format language available to "git
tag -v" and "git verify-tag" to include things like "%(gpg:status)",
we may want to change the behaviour so that piping a list of tag
names into
xargs git verify-tag --format='%(gpg:status) %(tag)'
becomes a good way to produce such a list, but that is a separate
topic.
Noticed-by: Jan Palus <jan.palus@gmail.com>
Helped-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Santiago Torres <santiago@nyu.edu>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Change "suceed" to "succeed" in a test description. The typo has been
here since the code was originally added in commit ef5a6fb597 ("Add
test-script for git-tag", 2007-06-28).
Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Change the test for "git tag -l" to not have an associated TODO
comment saying that it should return non-zero if there's no tags.
This was added in commit ef5a6fb597 ("Add test-script for git-tag",
2007-06-28) when the tests for "tag" were initially added, but at this
point changing this would be inconsistent with how "git tag" is a
synonym for "git tag -l", and would needlessly break external code
that relies on this porcelain command.
Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Change the tag test suite to test for --contains on a tree & blob. It
only accepts commits and will spew out "<object> is a tree, not a
commit".
It's sufficient to test this just for the "tag" and "branch" commands,
because it covers all the machinery shared between "branch" and
"for-each-ref".
Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Change the behavior of specifying --merged & --no-merged to be an
error, instead of silently picking the option that was provided last.
Subsequent changes of mine add a --no-contains option in addition to
the existing --contains. Providing both of those isn't an error, and
has actual meaning.
Making its cousins have different behavior in this regard would be
confusing to the user, especially since we'd be silently disregarding
some of their command-line input.
Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
"git tag" did not leave useful message when adding a new entry to
reflog; this was left unnoticed for a long time because refs/tags/*
doesn't keep reflog by default.
* cw/tag-reflog-message:
tag: generate useful reflog message
When tags are created with `--create-reflog` or with the option
`core.logAllRefUpdates` set to 'always', a reflog is created for them.
So far, the description of reflog entries for tags was empty, making the
reflog hard to understand. For example:
6e3a7b3 refs/tags/test@{0}:
Now, a reflog message is generated when creating a tag, following the
pattern "tag: tagging <short-sha1> (<description>)". If
GIT_REFLOG_ACTION is set, the message becomes "$GIT_REFLOG_ACTION
(<description>)" instead. If the tag references a commit object, the
description is set to the subject line of the commit, followed by its
commit date. For example:
6e3a7b3 refs/tags/test@{0}: tag: tagging 6e3a7b3398 (Git 2.12-rc0, 2017-02-03)
If the tag points to a tree/blob/tag objects, the following static
strings are taken as description:
- "tree object"
- "blob object"
- "other tag object"
Signed-off-by: Cornelius Weig <cornelius.weig@tngtech.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The "core.logAllRefUpdates" that used to be boolean has been
enhanced to take 'always' as well, to record ref updates to refs
other than the ones that are expected to be updated (i.e. branches,
remote-tracking branches and notes).
* cw/log-updates-for-all-refs-really:
doc: add note about ignoring '--no-create-reflog'
update-ref: add test cases for bare repository
refs: add option core.logAllRefUpdates = always
config: add markup to core.logAllRefUpdates doc
"git tag" and "git verify-tag" learned to put GPG verification
status in their "--format=<placeholders>" output format.
* st/verify-tag:
t/t7004-tag: Add --format specifier tests
t/t7030-verify-tag: Add --format specifier tests
builtin/tag: add --format argument for tag -v
builtin/verify-tag: add --format to verify-tag
ref-filter: add function to print single ref_array_item
gpg-interface, tag: add GPG_VERIFY_OMIT_STATUS flag
When core.logallrefupdates is true, we only create a new reflog for refs
that are under certain well-known hierarchies. The reason is that we
know that some hierarchies (like refs/tags) are not meant to change, and
that unknown hierarchies might not want reflogs at all (e.g., a
hypothetical refs/foo might be meant to change often and drop old
history immediately).
However, sometimes it is useful to override this decision and simply log
for all refs, because the safety and audit trail is more important than
the performance implications of keeping the log around.
This patch introduces a new "always" mode for the core.logallrefupdates
option which will log updates to everything under refs/, regardless
where in the hierarchy it is (we still will not log things like
ORIG_HEAD and FETCH_HEAD, which are known to be transient).
Based-on-patch-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Cornelius Weig <cornelius.weig@tngtech.com>
Reviewed-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The prereleaseSuffix feature of version comparison that is used in
"git tag -l" did not correctly when two or more prereleases for the
same release were present (e.g. when 2.0, 2.0-beta1, and 2.0-beta2
are there and the code needs to compare 2.0-beta1 and 2.0-beta2).
* sg/fix-versioncmp-with-common-suffix:
versioncmp: generalize version sort suffix reordering
versioncmp: factor out helper for suffix matching
versioncmp: use earliest-longest contained suffix to determine sorting order
versioncmp: cope with common part overlapping with prerelease suffix
versioncmp: pass full tagnames to swap_prereleases()
t7004-tag: add version sort tests to show prerelease reordering issues
t7004-tag: use test_config helper
t7004-tag: delete unnecessary tags with test_when_finished
tag -v now supports --format specifiers to inspect the contents of a tag
upon verification. Add two tests to ensure this behavior is respected in
future changes.
Signed-off-by: Santiago Torres <santiago@nyu.edu>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The 'versionsort.prereleaseSuffix' configuration variable, as its name
suggests, is supposed to only deal with tagnames with prerelease
suffixes, and allows sorting those prerelease tags in a user-defined
order before the suffixless main release tag, instead of sorting them
simply lexicographically.
However, the previous changes in this series resulted in an
interesting and useful property of version sort:
- The empty string as a configured suffix matches all tagnames,
including tagnames without any suffix, but
- tagnames containing a "real" configured suffix are still ordered
according to that real suffix, because any longer suffix takes
precedence over the empty string.
Exploiting this property we can easily generalize suffix reordering
and specify the order of tags with given suffixes not only before but
even after a main release tag by using the empty suffix to denote the
position of the main release tag, without any algorithm changes:
$ git -c versionsort.prereleaseSuffix=-alpha \
-c versionsort.prereleaseSuffix=-beta \
-c versionsort.prereleaseSuffix="" \
-c versionsort.prereleaseSuffix=-gamma \
-c versionsort.prereleaseSuffix=-delta \
tag -l --sort=version:refname 'v3.0*'
v3.0-alpha1
v3.0-beta1
v3.0
v3.0-gamma1
v3.0-delta1
Since 'versionsort.prereleaseSuffix' is not a fitting name for a
configuration variable to control this more general suffix reordering,
introduce the new variable 'versionsort.suffix'. Still keep the old
configuration variable name as a deprecated alias, though, to avoid
suddenly breaking setups already using it. Ignore the old variable if
both old and new configuration variables are set, but emit a warning
so users will be aware of it and can fix their configuration. Extend
the documentation to describe and add a test to check this more
general behavior.
Note: since the empty suffix matches all tagnames, tagnames with
suffixes not included in the configuration are listed together with
the suffixless main release tag, ordered lexicographically right after
that, i.e. before tags with suffixes listed in the configuration
following the empty suffix.
Signed-off-by: SZEDER Gábor <szeder.dev@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
When comparing tagnames, it is possible that a tagname contains more
than one of the configured prerelease suffixes around the first
different character. After fixing a bug in the previous commit such a
tagname is sorted according to the contained suffix which comes first
in the configuration. This is, however, not quite the right thing to
do in the following corner cases:
1. $ git -c versionsort.suffix=-bar
-c versionsort.suffix=-foo-baz
-c versionsort.suffix=-foo-bar
tag -l --sort=version:refname 'v1*'
v1.0-foo-bar
v1.0-foo-baz
The suffix of the tagname 'v1.0-foo-bar' is clearly '-foo-bar',
so it should be listed last. However, as it also contains '-bar'
around the first different character, it is listed first instead,
because that '-bar' suffix comes first the configuration.
2. One of the configured suffixes starts with the other:
$ git -c versionsort.prereleasesuffix=-pre \
-c versionsort.prereleasesuffix=-prerelease \
tag -l --sort=version:refname 'v2*'
v2.0-prerelease1
v2.0-pre1
v2.0-pre2
Here the tagname 'v2.0-prerelease1' should be the last. When
comparing 'v2.0-pre1' and 'v2.0-prerelease1' the first different
characters are '1' and 'r', respectively. Since this first
different character must be part of the configured suffix, the
'-pre' suffix is not recognized in the first tagname. OTOH, the
'-prerelease' suffix is properly recognized in
'v2.0-prerelease1', thus it is listed first.
Improve version sort in these corner cases, and
- look for a configured prerelease suffix containing the first
different character or ending right before it, so the '-pre'
suffixes are recognized in case (2). This also means that
when comparing tagnames 'v2.0-pre1' and 'v2.0-pre2',
swap_prereleases() would find the '-pre' suffix in both, but then
it will return "undecided" and the caller will do the right thing
by sorting based in '1' and '2'.
- If the tagname contains more than one suffix, then give precedence
to the contained suffix that starts at the earliest offset in the
tagname to address (1).
- If there are more than one suffixes starting at that earliest
position, then give precedence to the longest of those suffixes,
thus ensuring that in (2) the tagname 'v2.0-prerelease1' won't be
sorted based on the '-pre' suffix.
Add tests for these corner cases and adjust the documentation
accordingly.
Signed-off-by: SZEDER Gábor <szeder.dev@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Version sort with prerelease reordering sometimes puts tagnames in the
wrong order, when the common part of two compared tagnames overlaps
with the leading character(s) of one or more configured prerelease
suffixes. Note the position of "v2.1.0-beta-1":
$ git -c versionsort.prereleaseSuffix=-beta \
tag -l --sort=version:refname v2.1.*
v2.1.0-beta-2
v2.1.0-beta-3
v2.1.0
v2.1.0-RC1
v2.1.0-RC2
v2.1.0-beta-1
v2.1.1
v2.1.2
The reason is that when comparing a pair of tagnames, first
versioncmp() looks for the first different character in a pair of
tagnames, and then the swap_prereleases() helper function looks for a
configured prerelease suffix _starting at_ that character. Thus, when
in the above example the sorting algorithm happens to compare the
tagnames "v2.1.0-beta-1" and "v2.1.0-RC2", swap_prereleases() tries to
match the suffix "-beta" against "beta-1" to no avail, and the two
tagnames erroneously end up being ordered lexicographically.
To fix this issue change swap_prereleases() to look for configured
prerelease suffixes _containing_ the position of that first different
character.
Care must be taken, when a configured suffix is longer than the
tagnames' common part up to the first different character, to avoid
reading memory before the beginning of the tagnames. Add a test that
uses an exceptionally long prerelease suffix to check for this, in the
hope that in case of a regression the illegal memory access causes a
segfault in 'git tag' on one of the commonly used platforms (the test
happens to pass successfully on my Linux system with the safety check
removed), or at least makes valgrind complain.
Under some circumstances it's possible that more than one prerelease
suffixes can be found in the same tagname around that first different
character. With this simple bugfix patch such a tagname is sorted
according to the contained suffix that comes first in the
configuration for now. This is less than ideal in some cases, and the
following patch will take care of those.
Reported-by: Leho Kraav <leho@conversionready.com>
Signed-off-by: SZEDER Gábor <szeder.dev@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Version sort with prerelease reordering sometimes puts tagnames in the
wrong order, when the common part of two compared tagnames ends with
the leading character(s) of one or more configured prerelease
suffixes. Add tests that demonstrate these issues.
The unrelated '--format should list tags as per format given' test
later uses tags matching the same prefix as the version sort tests,
thus was affected by the new tags added for the new tests in this
patch. Change that test to perform its checks on a different set of
tags.
Signed-off-by: SZEDER Gábor <szeder.dev@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
... instead of setting and then manually unsetting configuration
variables, on one occasion even outside the test_expect_success block.
Signed-off-by: SZEDER Gábor <szeder.dev@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The '--force is moot with a non-existing tag name' test creates two
new tags, which are then deleted right after the test is finished,
outside the test_expect_success block, allowing 'git tag -d's output to
pollute the test output.
Use test_when_finished to delete those tags.
Signed-off-by: SZEDER Gábor <szeder.dev@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
This options makes sorting ignore case, which is great when you have
branches named bug-12-do-something, Bug-12-do-some-more and
BUG-12-do-what and want to group them together. Sorting externally may
not be an option because we lose coloring and column layout from
git-branch and git-tag.
The same could be said for filtering, but it's probably less important
because you can always go with the ugly pattern [bB][uU][gG]-* if you're
desperate.
You can't have case-sensitive filtering and case-insensitive sorting (or
the other way around) with this though. For branch and tag, that should
be no problem. for-each-ref, as a plumbing, might want finer control.
But we can always add --{filter,sort}-ignore-case when there is a need
for it.
Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
When we create a signature, it may happen that gpg returns with
"success" but not with an actual detached signature on stdout.
Check for the correct signature creation status to catch these cases
better. Really, --status-fd parsing is the only way to check gpg status
reliably. We do the same for verify already.
Signed-off-by: Michael J Gruber <git@drmicha.warpmail.net>
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The `tag.forcesignannotated` configuration variable makes "git tag"
that would implicitly create an annotated tag to instead create a
signed tag. For example
$ git tag -m "This is a message" tag-with-message
$ git tag -F message-file tag-with-message
would create a signed tag if the configuration variable is in
effect. To override this from the command line, the user can
explicitly ask for an annotated tag, like so:
$ git tag -a -m "This is a message" tag-with-message
$ git tag -a -F message-file tag-with-message
Creation of a light-weight tag, i.e.
$ git tag lightweight
is not affected.
Signed-off-by: Laurent Arnoud <laurent@spkdev.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
"git tag" started listing a tag "foo" as "tags/foo" when a branch
named "foo" exists in the same repository; remove this unnecessary
disambiguation, which is a regression introduced in v2.7.0.
* jk/list-tag-2.7-regression:
tag: do not show ambiguous tag names as "tags/foo"
t6300: use test_atom for some un-modern tests
Since b7cc53e9 (tag.c: use 'ref-filter' APIs, 2015-07-11),
git-tag has started showing tags with ambiguous names (i.e.,
when both "heads/foo" and "tags/foo" exists) as "tags/foo"
instead of just "foo". This is both:
- pointless; the output of "git tag" includes only
refs/tags, so we know that "foo" means the one in
"refs/tags".
and
- ambiguous; in the original output, we know that the line
"foo" means that "refs/tags/foo" exists. In the new
output, it is unclear whether we mean "refs/tags/foo" or
"refs/tags/tags/foo".
The reason this happens is that commit b7cc53e9 switched
git-tag to use ref-filter's "%(refname:short)" output
formatting, which was adapted from for-each-ref. This more
general code does not know that we care only about tags, and
uses shorten_unambiguous_ref to get the short-name. We need
to tell it that we care only about "refs/tags/", and it
should shorten with respect to that value.
In theory, the ref-filter code could figure this out by us
passing FILTER_REFS_TAGS. But there are two complications
there:
1. The handling of refname:short is deep in formatting
code that does not even have our ref_filter struct, let
alone the arguments to the filter_ref struct.
2. In git v2.7.0, we expose the formatting language to the
user. If we follow this path, it will mean that
"%(refname:short)" behaves differently for "tag" versus
"for-each-ref" (including "for-each-ref refs/tags/"),
which can lead to confusion.
Instead, let's add a new modifier to the formatting
language, "strip", to remove a specific set of prefix
components. This fixes "git tag", and lets users invoke the
same behavior from their own custom formats (for "tag" or
"for-each-ref") while leaving ":short" with its same
consistent meaning in all places.
We introduce a test in t7004 for "git tag", which fails
without this patch. We also add a similar test in t3203 for
"git branch", which does not actually fail. But since it is
likely that "branch" will eventually use the same formatting
code, the test helps defend against future regressions.
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The Git CodingGuidelines prefer the $(...) construct for command
substitution instead of using the backquotes `...`.
The backquoted form is the traditional method for command
substitution, and is supported by POSIX. However, all but the
simplest uses become complicated quickly. In particular, embedded
command substitutions and/or the use of double quotes require
careful escaping with the backslash character.
The patch was generated by:
for _f in $(find . -name "*.sh")
do
perl -i -pe 'BEGIN{undef $/;} s/`(.+?)`/\$(\1)/smg' "${_f}"
done
and then carefully proof-read.
Signed-off-by: Elia Pinto <gitter.spiros@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Use 'ref-filter' APIs to implement the '--merged' and '--no-merged'
options into 'tag.c'. The '--merged' option lets the user to only list
tags merged into the named commit. The '--no-merged' option lets the
user to only list tags not merged into the named commit. If no object
is provided it assumes HEAD as the object.
Add documentation and tests for the same.
Mentored-by: Christian Couder <christian.couder@gmail.com>
Mentored-by: Matthieu Moy <matthieu.moy@grenoble-inp.fr>
Signed-off-by: Karthik Nayak <karthik.188@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Implement the '--format' option provided by 'ref-filter'.
This lets the user list tags as per desired format similar
to the implementation in 'git for-each-ref'.
Add tests and documentation for the same.
Mentored-by: Christian Couder <christian.couder@gmail.com>
Mentored-by: Matthieu Moy <matthieu.moy@grenoble-inp.fr>
Signed-off-by: Karthik Nayak <karthik.188@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Make 'tag.c' use 'ref-filter' APIs for iterating through refs, sorting
and printing of refs. This removes most of the code used in 'tag.c'
replacing it with calls to the 'ref-filter' library.
Make 'tag.c' use the 'filter_refs()' function provided by 'ref-filter'
to filter out tags based on the options set.
For printing tags we use 'show_ref_array_item()' function provided by
'ref-filter'.
We improve the sorting option provided by 'tag.c' by using the sorting
options provided by 'ref-filter'. This causes the test 'invalid sort
parameter on command line' in t7004 to fail, as 'ref-filter' throws an
error for all sorting fields which are incorrect. The test is changed
to reflect the same.
Modify documentation for the same.
Mentored-by: Christian Couder <christian.couder@gmail.com>
Mentored-by: Matthieu Moy <matthieu.moy@grenoble-inp.fr>
Signed-off-by: Karthik Nayak <karthik.188@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Allow the creation of a ref (e.g. stash) with a reflog already in
place. For most refs (e.g. those under refs/heads), this happens
automatically, but for others, we need this option.
Currently, git does this by pre-creating the reflog, but alternate ref
backends might store reflogs somewhere other than .git/logs. Code
that now directly manipulates .git/logs should instead use git
plumbing commands.
I also added --create-reflog to git tag, just for completeness.
In a moment, we will use this argument to make git stash work with
alternate ref backends.
Signed-off-by: David Turner <dturner@twopensource.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
During creation of the patch series our discussion we could have a
more descriptive name for the prerequisite for the test so it stays
unique when other limits of ulimit are introduced.
Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
People often forget to chain the commands in their test together
with &&, leaving a failure from an earlier command in the test go
unnoticed. The new GIT_TEST_CHAIN_LINT mechanism allows you to
catch such a mistake more easily.
* jk/test-chain-lint: (36 commits)
t9001: drop save_confirm helper
t0020: use test_* helpers instead of hand-rolled messages
t: simplify loop exit-code status variables
t: fix some trivial cases of ignored exit codes in loops
t7701: fix ignored exit code inside loop
t3305: fix ignored exit code inside loop
t0020: fix ignored exit code inside loops
perf-lib: fix ignored exit code inside loop
t6039: fix broken && chain
t9158, t9161: fix broken &&-chain in git-svn tests
t9104: fix test for following larger parents
t4104: drop hand-rolled error reporting
t0005: fix broken &&-chains
t7004: fix embedded single-quotes
t0050: appease --chain-lint
t9001: use test_when_finished
t4117: use modern test_* helpers
t6034: use modern test_* helpers
t1301: use modern test_* helpers
t0020: use modern test_* helpers
...
The versionsort.prerelease configuration variable can be used to
specify that v1.0-pre1 comes before v1.0.
* nd/versioncmp-prereleases:
config.txt: update versioncmp.prereleaseSuffix
versionsort: support reorder prerelease suffixes
This test uses single quotes inside the single-quoted test
snippet, which effectively makes the contents unquoted.
Since they don't need quoted anyway, this isn't a problem,
but let's switch them to double-quotes to make it more
obviously correct.
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
These are tests which are missing a link in their &&-chain,
but during a setup phase. We may fail to notice failure in
commands that build the test environment, but these are
typically not expected to fail at all (but it's still good
to double-check that our test environment is what we
expect).
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
GnuPG >= 2.1.0 no longer supports RFC1991, so skip these tests.
Signed-off-by: Christian Hesse <mail@eworm.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
It was reported that the allocated stack space was too small for
some archs openSUSE buildfarm runs the tests on. Double it while
also doubling the amount of data to be handled.
Reported-by: Andreas Schwab <schwab@linux-m68k.org>
Suggested-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Tested-by: Andreas Schwab <schwab@linux-m68k.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Add support for configuring default sort ordering for git tags. Command
line option will override this configured value, using the exact same
syntax.
Cc: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Jacob Keller <jacob.e.keller@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The --sort tests should use the better format for >expect to maintain
indenting and ensure that no substitution is occurring. This makes
parsing and understanding the tests a bit easier.
Signed-off-by: Jacob Keller <jacob.e.keller@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
In large repos, the recursion implementation of contains(commit,
commit_list) may result in a stack overflow. Replace the recursion with
a loop to fix it.
This problem is more apparent on Windows than on Linux, where the stack
is more limited by default.
See also this thread on the msysGit list:
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/msysgit/FqT6boJrb2g/discussion
[jes: re-written to imitate the original recursion more closely]
Thomas Braun pointed out several documentation shortcomings.
Tests are run only if ulimit -s is available. This means they cannot
be run on Windows.
Signed-off-by: Jean-Jacques Lafay <jeanjacques.lafay@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Tested-by: Stepan Kasal <kasal@ucw.cz>
Reviewed-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
--sort=version:refname (or --sort=v:refname for short) sorts tags as
if they are versions. --sort=-refname reverses the order (with or
without ":version").
versioncmp() is copied from string/strverscmp.c in glibc commit
ee9247c38a8def24a59eb5cfb7196a98bef8cfdc, reformatted to Git coding
style. The implementation is under LGPL-2.1 and according to [1] I can
relicense it to GPLv2.
[1] http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#AllCompatibility
Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
