You can not select more than 25 topics Topics must start with a letter or number, can include dashes ('-') and can be up to 35 characters long.

507 lines
11 KiB

Multi-backend merge driver. The new command 'git merge' takes the current head and one or more remote heads, with the commit log message for the automated case. If the heads being merged are simple fast-forwards, it acts the same way as the current 'git resolve'. Otherwise, it tries different merge strategies and takes the result from the one that succeeded auto-merging, if there is any. If no merge strategy succeeds auto-merging, their results are evaluated for number of paths needed for hand resolving, and the one with the least number of such paths is left in the working tree. The user is asked to resolve them by hand and make a commit manually. The calling convention from the 'git merge' driver to merge strategy programs is very simple: - A strategy program is to be called 'git-merge-<strategy>'. - They take input of this form: <common1> <common2> ... '--' <head> <remote1> <remote2>... That is, one or more the common ancestors, double dash, the current head, and one or more remote heads being merged into the current branch. - Before a strategy program is called, the working tree is matched to the current <head>. - The strategy program exits with status code 0 when it successfully auto-merges the given heads. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths when it does so -- the index file will be used to record the merge result as a commit by the driver. - The strategy program exits with status code 1 when it leaves conflicts behind. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths that it successfully auto-merged, and leave the cache entry in the index file as the same as <head> for paths it could not auto-merge, and leave its best-effort result with conflict markers in the working tree when it does so. - The strategy program exists with status code other than 0 or 1 if it does not handle the given merge at all. As examples, this commit comes with merge strategies based on 'git resolve' and 'git octopus'. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
20 years ago
#!/bin/sh
#
# Copyright (c) 2005 Junio C Hamano
#
USAGE='[-n] [--summary] [--no-commit] [--squash] [-s <strategy>] [-m=<merge-message>] <commit>+'
SUBDIRECTORY_OK=Yes
. git-sh-setup
require_work_tree
cd_to_toplevel
Multi-backend merge driver. The new command 'git merge' takes the current head and one or more remote heads, with the commit log message for the automated case. If the heads being merged are simple fast-forwards, it acts the same way as the current 'git resolve'. Otherwise, it tries different merge strategies and takes the result from the one that succeeded auto-merging, if there is any. If no merge strategy succeeds auto-merging, their results are evaluated for number of paths needed for hand resolving, and the one with the least number of such paths is left in the working tree. The user is asked to resolve them by hand and make a commit manually. The calling convention from the 'git merge' driver to merge strategy programs is very simple: - A strategy program is to be called 'git-merge-<strategy>'. - They take input of this form: <common1> <common2> ... '--' <head> <remote1> <remote2>... That is, one or more the common ancestors, double dash, the current head, and one or more remote heads being merged into the current branch. - Before a strategy program is called, the working tree is matched to the current <head>. - The strategy program exits with status code 0 when it successfully auto-merges the given heads. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths when it does so -- the index file will be used to record the merge result as a commit by the driver. - The strategy program exits with status code 1 when it leaves conflicts behind. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths that it successfully auto-merged, and leave the cache entry in the index file as the same as <head> for paths it could not auto-merge, and leave its best-effort result with conflict markers in the working tree when it does so. - The strategy program exists with status code other than 0 or 1 if it does not handle the given merge at all. As examples, this commit comes with merge strategies based on 'git resolve' and 'git octopus'. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
20 years ago
test -z "$(git ls-files -u)" ||
die "You are in the middle of a conflicted merge."
Multi-backend merge driver. The new command 'git merge' takes the current head and one or more remote heads, with the commit log message for the automated case. If the heads being merged are simple fast-forwards, it acts the same way as the current 'git resolve'. Otherwise, it tries different merge strategies and takes the result from the one that succeeded auto-merging, if there is any. If no merge strategy succeeds auto-merging, their results are evaluated for number of paths needed for hand resolving, and the one with the least number of such paths is left in the working tree. The user is asked to resolve them by hand and make a commit manually. The calling convention from the 'git merge' driver to merge strategy programs is very simple: - A strategy program is to be called 'git-merge-<strategy>'. - They take input of this form: <common1> <common2> ... '--' <head> <remote1> <remote2>... That is, one or more the common ancestors, double dash, the current head, and one or more remote heads being merged into the current branch. - Before a strategy program is called, the working tree is matched to the current <head>. - The strategy program exits with status code 0 when it successfully auto-merges the given heads. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths when it does so -- the index file will be used to record the merge result as a commit by the driver. - The strategy program exits with status code 1 when it leaves conflicts behind. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths that it successfully auto-merged, and leave the cache entry in the index file as the same as <head> for paths it could not auto-merge, and leave its best-effort result with conflict markers in the working tree when it does so. - The strategy program exists with status code other than 0 or 1 if it does not handle the given merge at all. As examples, this commit comes with merge strategies based on 'git resolve' and 'git octopus'. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
20 years ago
LF='
'
all_strategies='recur recursive octopus resolve stupid ours subtree'
default_twohead_strategies='recursive'
default_octopus_strategies='octopus'
no_fast_forward_strategies='subtree ours'
no_trivial_strategies='recursive recur subtree ours'
Multi-backend merge driver. The new command 'git merge' takes the current head and one or more remote heads, with the commit log message for the automated case. If the heads being merged are simple fast-forwards, it acts the same way as the current 'git resolve'. Otherwise, it tries different merge strategies and takes the result from the one that succeeded auto-merging, if there is any. If no merge strategy succeeds auto-merging, their results are evaluated for number of paths needed for hand resolving, and the one with the least number of such paths is left in the working tree. The user is asked to resolve them by hand and make a commit manually. The calling convention from the 'git merge' driver to merge strategy programs is very simple: - A strategy program is to be called 'git-merge-<strategy>'. - They take input of this form: <common1> <common2> ... '--' <head> <remote1> <remote2>... That is, one or more the common ancestors, double dash, the current head, and one or more remote heads being merged into the current branch. - Before a strategy program is called, the working tree is matched to the current <head>. - The strategy program exits with status code 0 when it successfully auto-merges the given heads. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths when it does so -- the index file will be used to record the merge result as a commit by the driver. - The strategy program exits with status code 1 when it leaves conflicts behind. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths that it successfully auto-merged, and leave the cache entry in the index file as the same as <head> for paths it could not auto-merge, and leave its best-effort result with conflict markers in the working tree when it does so. - The strategy program exists with status code other than 0 or 1 if it does not handle the given merge at all. As examples, this commit comes with merge strategies based on 'git resolve' and 'git octopus'. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
20 years ago
use_strategies=
allow_fast_forward=t
allow_trivial_merge=t
Multi-backend merge driver. The new command 'git merge' takes the current head and one or more remote heads, with the commit log message for the automated case. If the heads being merged are simple fast-forwards, it acts the same way as the current 'git resolve'. Otherwise, it tries different merge strategies and takes the result from the one that succeeded auto-merging, if there is any. If no merge strategy succeeds auto-merging, their results are evaluated for number of paths needed for hand resolving, and the one with the least number of such paths is left in the working tree. The user is asked to resolve them by hand and make a commit manually. The calling convention from the 'git merge' driver to merge strategy programs is very simple: - A strategy program is to be called 'git-merge-<strategy>'. - They take input of this form: <common1> <common2> ... '--' <head> <remote1> <remote2>... That is, one or more the common ancestors, double dash, the current head, and one or more remote heads being merged into the current branch. - Before a strategy program is called, the working tree is matched to the current <head>. - The strategy program exits with status code 0 when it successfully auto-merges the given heads. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths when it does so -- the index file will be used to record the merge result as a commit by the driver. - The strategy program exits with status code 1 when it leaves conflicts behind. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths that it successfully auto-merged, and leave the cache entry in the index file as the same as <head> for paths it could not auto-merge, and leave its best-effort result with conflict markers in the working tree when it does so. - The strategy program exists with status code other than 0 or 1 if it does not handle the given merge at all. As examples, this commit comes with merge strategies based on 'git resolve' and 'git octopus'. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
20 years ago
dropsave() {
rm -f -- "$GIT_DIR/MERGE_HEAD" "$GIT_DIR/MERGE_MSG" \
"$GIT_DIR/MERGE_SAVE" || exit 1
}
savestate() {
# Stash away any local modifications.
git diff-index -z --name-only $head |
cpio -0 -o >"$GIT_DIR/MERGE_SAVE"
}
restorestate() {
if test -f "$GIT_DIR/MERGE_SAVE"
then
git reset --hard $head >/dev/null
cpio -iuv <"$GIT_DIR/MERGE_SAVE"
git update-index --refresh >/dev/null
fi
Multi-backend merge driver. The new command 'git merge' takes the current head and one or more remote heads, with the commit log message for the automated case. If the heads being merged are simple fast-forwards, it acts the same way as the current 'git resolve'. Otherwise, it tries different merge strategies and takes the result from the one that succeeded auto-merging, if there is any. If no merge strategy succeeds auto-merging, their results are evaluated for number of paths needed for hand resolving, and the one with the least number of such paths is left in the working tree. The user is asked to resolve them by hand and make a commit manually. The calling convention from the 'git merge' driver to merge strategy programs is very simple: - A strategy program is to be called 'git-merge-<strategy>'. - They take input of this form: <common1> <common2> ... '--' <head> <remote1> <remote2>... That is, one or more the common ancestors, double dash, the current head, and one or more remote heads being merged into the current branch. - Before a strategy program is called, the working tree is matched to the current <head>. - The strategy program exits with status code 0 when it successfully auto-merges the given heads. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths when it does so -- the index file will be used to record the merge result as a commit by the driver. - The strategy program exits with status code 1 when it leaves conflicts behind. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths that it successfully auto-merged, and leave the cache entry in the index file as the same as <head> for paths it could not auto-merge, and leave its best-effort result with conflict markers in the working tree when it does so. - The strategy program exists with status code other than 0 or 1 if it does not handle the given merge at all. As examples, this commit comes with merge strategies based on 'git resolve' and 'git octopus'. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
20 years ago
}
git-merge --squash Some people tend to do many little commits on a topic branch, recording all the trials and errors, and when the topic is reasonably cooked well, would want to record the net effect of the series as one commit on top of the mainline, removing the cruft from the history. The topic is then abandoned or forked off again from that point at the mainline. The barebone porcelainish that comes with core git tools does not officially support such operation, but you can fake it by using "git pull --no-merge" when such a topic branch is not a strict superset of the mainline, like this: git checkout mainline git pull --no-commit . that-topic-branch : fix conflicts if any rm -f .git/MERGE_HEAD git commit -a -m 'consolidated commit log message' git branch -f that-topic-branch ;# now fully merged This however does not work when the topic branch is a fast forward of the mainline, because normal "git pull" will never create a merge commit in such a case, and there is nothing special --no-commit could do to begin with. This patch introduces a new option, --squash, to support such a workflow officially in both fast-forward case and true merge case. The user-level operation would be the same in both cases: git checkout mainline git pull --squash . that-topic-branch : fix conflicts if any -- naturally, there would be : no conflict if fast forward. git commit -a -m 'consolidated commit log message' git branch -f that-topic-branch ;# now fully merged When the current branch is already up-to-date with respect to the other branch, there truly is nothing to do, so the new option does not have any effect. This was brought up in #git IRC channel recently. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
19 years ago
finish_up_to_date () {
case "$squash" in
t)
echo "$1 (nothing to squash)" ;;
'')
echo "$1" ;;
esac
dropsave
}
squash_message () {
echo Squashed commit of the following:
echo
git log --no-merges ^"$head" $remote
git-merge --squash Some people tend to do many little commits on a topic branch, recording all the trials and errors, and when the topic is reasonably cooked well, would want to record the net effect of the series as one commit on top of the mainline, removing the cruft from the history. The topic is then abandoned or forked off again from that point at the mainline. The barebone porcelainish that comes with core git tools does not officially support such operation, but you can fake it by using "git pull --no-merge" when such a topic branch is not a strict superset of the mainline, like this: git checkout mainline git pull --no-commit . that-topic-branch : fix conflicts if any rm -f .git/MERGE_HEAD git commit -a -m 'consolidated commit log message' git branch -f that-topic-branch ;# now fully merged This however does not work when the topic branch is a fast forward of the mainline, because normal "git pull" will never create a merge commit in such a case, and there is nothing special --no-commit could do to begin with. This patch introduces a new option, --squash, to support such a workflow officially in both fast-forward case and true merge case. The user-level operation would be the same in both cases: git checkout mainline git pull --squash . that-topic-branch : fix conflicts if any -- naturally, there would be : no conflict if fast forward. git commit -a -m 'consolidated commit log message' git branch -f that-topic-branch ;# now fully merged When the current branch is already up-to-date with respect to the other branch, there truly is nothing to do, so the new option does not have any effect. This was brought up in #git IRC channel recently. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
19 years ago
}
finish () {
if test '' = "$2"
then
rlogm="$GIT_REFLOG_ACTION"
else
echo "$2"
rlogm="$GIT_REFLOG_ACTION: $2"
fi
git-merge --squash Some people tend to do many little commits on a topic branch, recording all the trials and errors, and when the topic is reasonably cooked well, would want to record the net effect of the series as one commit on top of the mainline, removing the cruft from the history. The topic is then abandoned or forked off again from that point at the mainline. The barebone porcelainish that comes with core git tools does not officially support such operation, but you can fake it by using "git pull --no-merge" when such a topic branch is not a strict superset of the mainline, like this: git checkout mainline git pull --no-commit . that-topic-branch : fix conflicts if any rm -f .git/MERGE_HEAD git commit -a -m 'consolidated commit log message' git branch -f that-topic-branch ;# now fully merged This however does not work when the topic branch is a fast forward of the mainline, because normal "git pull" will never create a merge commit in such a case, and there is nothing special --no-commit could do to begin with. This patch introduces a new option, --squash, to support such a workflow officially in both fast-forward case and true merge case. The user-level operation would be the same in both cases: git checkout mainline git pull --squash . that-topic-branch : fix conflicts if any -- naturally, there would be : no conflict if fast forward. git commit -a -m 'consolidated commit log message' git branch -f that-topic-branch ;# now fully merged When the current branch is already up-to-date with respect to the other branch, there truly is nothing to do, so the new option does not have any effect. This was brought up in #git IRC channel recently. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
19 years ago
case "$squash" in
t)
echo "Squash commit -- not updating HEAD"
squash_message >"$GIT_DIR/SQUASH_MSG"
;;
git-merge --squash Some people tend to do many little commits on a topic branch, recording all the trials and errors, and when the topic is reasonably cooked well, would want to record the net effect of the series as one commit on top of the mainline, removing the cruft from the history. The topic is then abandoned or forked off again from that point at the mainline. The barebone porcelainish that comes with core git tools does not officially support such operation, but you can fake it by using "git pull --no-merge" when such a topic branch is not a strict superset of the mainline, like this: git checkout mainline git pull --no-commit . that-topic-branch : fix conflicts if any rm -f .git/MERGE_HEAD git commit -a -m 'consolidated commit log message' git branch -f that-topic-branch ;# now fully merged This however does not work when the topic branch is a fast forward of the mainline, because normal "git pull" will never create a merge commit in such a case, and there is nothing special --no-commit could do to begin with. This patch introduces a new option, --squash, to support such a workflow officially in both fast-forward case and true merge case. The user-level operation would be the same in both cases: git checkout mainline git pull --squash . that-topic-branch : fix conflicts if any -- naturally, there would be : no conflict if fast forward. git commit -a -m 'consolidated commit log message' git branch -f that-topic-branch ;# now fully merged When the current branch is already up-to-date with respect to the other branch, there truly is nothing to do, so the new option does not have any effect. This was brought up in #git IRC channel recently. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
19 years ago
'')
case "$merge_msg" in
'')
echo "No merge message -- not updating HEAD"
;;
*)
git update-ref -m "$rlogm" HEAD "$1" "$head" || exit 1
git-merge --squash Some people tend to do many little commits on a topic branch, recording all the trials and errors, and when the topic is reasonably cooked well, would want to record the net effect of the series as one commit on top of the mainline, removing the cruft from the history. The topic is then abandoned or forked off again from that point at the mainline. The barebone porcelainish that comes with core git tools does not officially support such operation, but you can fake it by using "git pull --no-merge" when such a topic branch is not a strict superset of the mainline, like this: git checkout mainline git pull --no-commit . that-topic-branch : fix conflicts if any rm -f .git/MERGE_HEAD git commit -a -m 'consolidated commit log message' git branch -f that-topic-branch ;# now fully merged This however does not work when the topic branch is a fast forward of the mainline, because normal "git pull" will never create a merge commit in such a case, and there is nothing special --no-commit could do to begin with. This patch introduces a new option, --squash, to support such a workflow officially in both fast-forward case and true merge case. The user-level operation would be the same in both cases: git checkout mainline git pull --squash . that-topic-branch : fix conflicts if any -- naturally, there would be : no conflict if fast forward. git commit -a -m 'consolidated commit log message' git branch -f that-topic-branch ;# now fully merged When the current branch is already up-to-date with respect to the other branch, there truly is nothing to do, so the new option does not have any effect. This was brought up in #git IRC channel recently. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
19 years ago
;;
esac
;;
esac
git-merge --squash Some people tend to do many little commits on a topic branch, recording all the trials and errors, and when the topic is reasonably cooked well, would want to record the net effect of the series as one commit on top of the mainline, removing the cruft from the history. The topic is then abandoned or forked off again from that point at the mainline. The barebone porcelainish that comes with core git tools does not officially support such operation, but you can fake it by using "git pull --no-merge" when such a topic branch is not a strict superset of the mainline, like this: git checkout mainline git pull --no-commit . that-topic-branch : fix conflicts if any rm -f .git/MERGE_HEAD git commit -a -m 'consolidated commit log message' git branch -f that-topic-branch ;# now fully merged This however does not work when the topic branch is a fast forward of the mainline, because normal "git pull" will never create a merge commit in such a case, and there is nothing special --no-commit could do to begin with. This patch introduces a new option, --squash, to support such a workflow officially in both fast-forward case and true merge case. The user-level operation would be the same in both cases: git checkout mainline git pull --squash . that-topic-branch : fix conflicts if any -- naturally, there would be : no conflict if fast forward. git commit -a -m 'consolidated commit log message' git branch -f that-topic-branch ;# now fully merged When the current branch is already up-to-date with respect to the other branch, there truly is nothing to do, so the new option does not have any effect. This was brought up in #git IRC channel recently. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
19 years ago
case "$1" in
Multi-backend merge driver. The new command 'git merge' takes the current head and one or more remote heads, with the commit log message for the automated case. If the heads being merged are simple fast-forwards, it acts the same way as the current 'git resolve'. Otherwise, it tries different merge strategies and takes the result from the one that succeeded auto-merging, if there is any. If no merge strategy succeeds auto-merging, their results are evaluated for number of paths needed for hand resolving, and the one with the least number of such paths is left in the working tree. The user is asked to resolve them by hand and make a commit manually. The calling convention from the 'git merge' driver to merge strategy programs is very simple: - A strategy program is to be called 'git-merge-<strategy>'. - They take input of this form: <common1> <common2> ... '--' <head> <remote1> <remote2>... That is, one or more the common ancestors, double dash, the current head, and one or more remote heads being merged into the current branch. - Before a strategy program is called, the working tree is matched to the current <head>. - The strategy program exits with status code 0 when it successfully auto-merges the given heads. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths when it does so -- the index file will be used to record the merge result as a commit by the driver. - The strategy program exits with status code 1 when it leaves conflicts behind. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths that it successfully auto-merged, and leave the cache entry in the index file as the same as <head> for paths it could not auto-merge, and leave its best-effort result with conflict markers in the working tree when it does so. - The strategy program exists with status code other than 0 or 1 if it does not handle the given merge at all. As examples, this commit comes with merge strategies based on 'git resolve' and 'git octopus'. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
20 years ago
'')
git-merge --squash Some people tend to do many little commits on a topic branch, recording all the trials and errors, and when the topic is reasonably cooked well, would want to record the net effect of the series as one commit on top of the mainline, removing the cruft from the history. The topic is then abandoned or forked off again from that point at the mainline. The barebone porcelainish that comes with core git tools does not officially support such operation, but you can fake it by using "git pull --no-merge" when such a topic branch is not a strict superset of the mainline, like this: git checkout mainline git pull --no-commit . that-topic-branch : fix conflicts if any rm -f .git/MERGE_HEAD git commit -a -m 'consolidated commit log message' git branch -f that-topic-branch ;# now fully merged This however does not work when the topic branch is a fast forward of the mainline, because normal "git pull" will never create a merge commit in such a case, and there is nothing special --no-commit could do to begin with. This patch introduces a new option, --squash, to support such a workflow officially in both fast-forward case and true merge case. The user-level operation would be the same in both cases: git checkout mainline git pull --squash . that-topic-branch : fix conflicts if any -- naturally, there would be : no conflict if fast forward. git commit -a -m 'consolidated commit log message' git branch -f that-topic-branch ;# now fully merged When the current branch is already up-to-date with respect to the other branch, there truly is nothing to do, so the new option does not have any effect. This was brought up in #git IRC channel recently. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
19 years ago
;;
?*)
if test "$show_diffstat" = t
then
# We want color (if set), but no pager
GIT_PAGER='' git diff --stat --summary -M "$head" "$1"
fi
Multi-backend merge driver. The new command 'git merge' takes the current head and one or more remote heads, with the commit log message for the automated case. If the heads being merged are simple fast-forwards, it acts the same way as the current 'git resolve'. Otherwise, it tries different merge strategies and takes the result from the one that succeeded auto-merging, if there is any. If no merge strategy succeeds auto-merging, their results are evaluated for number of paths needed for hand resolving, and the one with the least number of such paths is left in the working tree. The user is asked to resolve them by hand and make a commit manually. The calling convention from the 'git merge' driver to merge strategy programs is very simple: - A strategy program is to be called 'git-merge-<strategy>'. - They take input of this form: <common1> <common2> ... '--' <head> <remote1> <remote2>... That is, one or more the common ancestors, double dash, the current head, and one or more remote heads being merged into the current branch. - Before a strategy program is called, the working tree is matched to the current <head>. - The strategy program exits with status code 0 when it successfully auto-merges the given heads. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths when it does so -- the index file will be used to record the merge result as a commit by the driver. - The strategy program exits with status code 1 when it leaves conflicts behind. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths that it successfully auto-merged, and leave the cache entry in the index file as the same as <head> for paths it could not auto-merge, and leave its best-effort result with conflict markers in the working tree when it does so. - The strategy program exists with status code other than 0 or 1 if it does not handle the given merge at all. As examples, this commit comes with merge strategies based on 'git resolve' and 'git octopus'. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
20 years ago
;;
esac
}
merge_name () {
remote="$1"
rh=$(git rev-parse --verify "$remote^0" 2>/dev/null) || return
bh=$(git show-ref -s --verify "refs/heads/$remote" 2>/dev/null)
if test "$rh" = "$bh"
then
echo "$rh branch '$remote' of ."
elif truname=$(expr "$remote" : '\(.*\)~[1-9][0-9]*$') &&
git show-ref -q --verify "refs/heads/$truname" 2>/dev/null
then
echo "$rh branch '$truname' (early part) of ."
elif test "$remote" = "FETCH_HEAD" -a -r "$GIT_DIR/FETCH_HEAD"
then
sed -e 's/ not-for-merge / /' -e 1q \
"$GIT_DIR/FETCH_HEAD"
else
echo "$rh commit '$remote'"
fi
}
case "$#" in 0) usage ;; esac
have_message=
Multi-backend merge driver. The new command 'git merge' takes the current head and one or more remote heads, with the commit log message for the automated case. If the heads being merged are simple fast-forwards, it acts the same way as the current 'git resolve'. Otherwise, it tries different merge strategies and takes the result from the one that succeeded auto-merging, if there is any. If no merge strategy succeeds auto-merging, their results are evaluated for number of paths needed for hand resolving, and the one with the least number of such paths is left in the working tree. The user is asked to resolve them by hand and make a commit manually. The calling convention from the 'git merge' driver to merge strategy programs is very simple: - A strategy program is to be called 'git-merge-<strategy>'. - They take input of this form: <common1> <common2> ... '--' <head> <remote1> <remote2>... That is, one or more the common ancestors, double dash, the current head, and one or more remote heads being merged into the current branch. - Before a strategy program is called, the working tree is matched to the current <head>. - The strategy program exits with status code 0 when it successfully auto-merges the given heads. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths when it does so -- the index file will be used to record the merge result as a commit by the driver. - The strategy program exits with status code 1 when it leaves conflicts behind. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths that it successfully auto-merged, and leave the cache entry in the index file as the same as <head> for paths it could not auto-merge, and leave its best-effort result with conflict markers in the working tree when it does so. - The strategy program exists with status code other than 0 or 1 if it does not handle the given merge at all. As examples, this commit comes with merge strategies based on 'git resolve' and 'git octopus'. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
20 years ago
while case "$#" in 0) break ;; esac
do
case "$1" in
-n|--n|--no|--no-|--no-s|--no-su|--no-sum|--no-summ|\
--no-summa|--no-summar|--no-summary)
show_diffstat=false ;;
--summary)
show_diffstat=t ;;
git-merge --squash Some people tend to do many little commits on a topic branch, recording all the trials and errors, and when the topic is reasonably cooked well, would want to record the net effect of the series as one commit on top of the mainline, removing the cruft from the history. The topic is then abandoned or forked off again from that point at the mainline. The barebone porcelainish that comes with core git tools does not officially support such operation, but you can fake it by using "git pull --no-merge" when such a topic branch is not a strict superset of the mainline, like this: git checkout mainline git pull --no-commit . that-topic-branch : fix conflicts if any rm -f .git/MERGE_HEAD git commit -a -m 'consolidated commit log message' git branch -f that-topic-branch ;# now fully merged This however does not work when the topic branch is a fast forward of the mainline, because normal "git pull" will never create a merge commit in such a case, and there is nothing special --no-commit could do to begin with. This patch introduces a new option, --squash, to support such a workflow officially in both fast-forward case and true merge case. The user-level operation would be the same in both cases: git checkout mainline git pull --squash . that-topic-branch : fix conflicts if any -- naturally, there would be : no conflict if fast forward. git commit -a -m 'consolidated commit log message' git branch -f that-topic-branch ;# now fully merged When the current branch is already up-to-date with respect to the other branch, there truly is nothing to do, so the new option does not have any effect. This was brought up in #git IRC channel recently. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
19 years ago
--sq|--squ|--squa|--squas|--squash)
squash=t no_commit=t ;;
--no-c|--no-co|--no-com|--no-comm|--no-commi|--no-commit)
no_commit=t ;;
Multi-backend merge driver. The new command 'git merge' takes the current head and one or more remote heads, with the commit log message for the automated case. If the heads being merged are simple fast-forwards, it acts the same way as the current 'git resolve'. Otherwise, it tries different merge strategies and takes the result from the one that succeeded auto-merging, if there is any. If no merge strategy succeeds auto-merging, their results are evaluated for number of paths needed for hand resolving, and the one with the least number of such paths is left in the working tree. The user is asked to resolve them by hand and make a commit manually. The calling convention from the 'git merge' driver to merge strategy programs is very simple: - A strategy program is to be called 'git-merge-<strategy>'. - They take input of this form: <common1> <common2> ... '--' <head> <remote1> <remote2>... That is, one or more the common ancestors, double dash, the current head, and one or more remote heads being merged into the current branch. - Before a strategy program is called, the working tree is matched to the current <head>. - The strategy program exits with status code 0 when it successfully auto-merges the given heads. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths when it does so -- the index file will be used to record the merge result as a commit by the driver. - The strategy program exits with status code 1 when it leaves conflicts behind. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths that it successfully auto-merged, and leave the cache entry in the index file as the same as <head> for paths it could not auto-merge, and leave its best-effort result with conflict markers in the working tree when it does so. - The strategy program exists with status code other than 0 or 1 if it does not handle the given merge at all. As examples, this commit comes with merge strategies based on 'git resolve' and 'git octopus'. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
20 years ago
-s=*|--s=*|--st=*|--str=*|--stra=*|--strat=*|--strate=*|\
--strateg=*|--strategy=*|\
-s|--s|--st|--str|--stra|--strat|--strate|--strateg|--strategy)
case "$#,$1" in
*,*=*)
strategy=`expr "z$1" : 'z-[^=]*=\(.*\)'` ;;
1,*)
Multi-backend merge driver. The new command 'git merge' takes the current head and one or more remote heads, with the commit log message for the automated case. If the heads being merged are simple fast-forwards, it acts the same way as the current 'git resolve'. Otherwise, it tries different merge strategies and takes the result from the one that succeeded auto-merging, if there is any. If no merge strategy succeeds auto-merging, their results are evaluated for number of paths needed for hand resolving, and the one with the least number of such paths is left in the working tree. The user is asked to resolve them by hand and make a commit manually. The calling convention from the 'git merge' driver to merge strategy programs is very simple: - A strategy program is to be called 'git-merge-<strategy>'. - They take input of this form: <common1> <common2> ... '--' <head> <remote1> <remote2>... That is, one or more the common ancestors, double dash, the current head, and one or more remote heads being merged into the current branch. - Before a strategy program is called, the working tree is matched to the current <head>. - The strategy program exits with status code 0 when it successfully auto-merges the given heads. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths when it does so -- the index file will be used to record the merge result as a commit by the driver. - The strategy program exits with status code 1 when it leaves conflicts behind. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths that it successfully auto-merged, and leave the cache entry in the index file as the same as <head> for paths it could not auto-merge, and leave its best-effort result with conflict markers in the working tree when it does so. - The strategy program exists with status code other than 0 or 1 if it does not handle the given merge at all. As examples, this commit comes with merge strategies based on 'git resolve' and 'git octopus'. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
20 years ago
usage ;;
*)
strategy="$2"
shift ;;
esac
case " $all_strategies " in
*" $strategy "*)
use_strategies="$use_strategies$strategy " ;;
*)
die "available strategies are: $all_strategies" ;;
esac
;;
-m=*|--m=*|--me=*|--mes=*|--mess=*|--messa=*|--messag=*|--message=*)
merge_msg=`expr "z$1" : 'z-[^=]*=\(.*\)'`
have_message=t
;;
-m|--m|--me|--mes|--mess|--messa|--messag|--message)
shift
case "$#" in
1) usage ;;
esac
merge_msg="$1"
have_message=t
;;
Multi-backend merge driver. The new command 'git merge' takes the current head and one or more remote heads, with the commit log message for the automated case. If the heads being merged are simple fast-forwards, it acts the same way as the current 'git resolve'. Otherwise, it tries different merge strategies and takes the result from the one that succeeded auto-merging, if there is any. If no merge strategy succeeds auto-merging, their results are evaluated for number of paths needed for hand resolving, and the one with the least number of such paths is left in the working tree. The user is asked to resolve them by hand and make a commit manually. The calling convention from the 'git merge' driver to merge strategy programs is very simple: - A strategy program is to be called 'git-merge-<strategy>'. - They take input of this form: <common1> <common2> ... '--' <head> <remote1> <remote2>... That is, one or more the common ancestors, double dash, the current head, and one or more remote heads being merged into the current branch. - Before a strategy program is called, the working tree is matched to the current <head>. - The strategy program exits with status code 0 when it successfully auto-merges the given heads. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths when it does so -- the index file will be used to record the merge result as a commit by the driver. - The strategy program exits with status code 1 when it leaves conflicts behind. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths that it successfully auto-merged, and leave the cache entry in the index file as the same as <head> for paths it could not auto-merge, and leave its best-effort result with conflict markers in the working tree when it does so. - The strategy program exists with status code other than 0 or 1 if it does not handle the given merge at all. As examples, this commit comes with merge strategies based on 'git resolve' and 'git octopus'. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
20 years ago
-*) usage ;;
*) break ;;
esac
shift
done
if test -z "$show_diffstat"; then
test "$(git config --bool merge.diffstat)" = false && show_diffstat=false
test -z "$show_diffstat" && show_diffstat=t
fi
# This could be traditional "merge <msg> HEAD <commit>..." and the
# way we can tell it is to see if the second token is HEAD, but some
# people might have misused the interface and used a committish that
# is the same as HEAD there instead. Traditional format never would
# have "-m" so it is an additional safety measure to check for it.
if test -z "$have_message" &&
second_token=$(git rev-parse --verify "$2^0" 2>/dev/null) &&
head_commit=$(git rev-parse --verify "HEAD" 2>/dev/null) &&
test "$second_token" = "$head_commit"
then
merge_msg="$1"
shift
head_arg="$1"
shift
elif ! git rev-parse --verify HEAD >/dev/null 2>&1
then
# If the merged head is a valid one there is no reason to
# forbid "git merge" into a branch yet to be born. We do
# the same for "git pull".
if test 1 -ne $#
then
echo >&2 "Can merge only exactly one commit into empty head"
exit 1
fi
rh=$(git rev-parse --verify "$1^0") ||
die "$1 - not something we can merge"
git update-ref -m "initial pull" HEAD "$rh" "" &&
git read-tree --reset -u HEAD
exit
else
# We are invoked directly as the first-class UI.
head_arg=HEAD
# All the rest are the commits being merged; prepare
# the standard merge summary message to be appended to
# the given message. If remote is invalid we will die
# later in the common codepath so we discard the error
# in this loop.
merge_name=$(for remote
do
merge_name "$remote"
done | git fmt-merge-msg
)
merge_msg="${merge_msg:+$merge_msg$LF$LF}$merge_name"
fi
head=$(git rev-parse --verify "$head_arg"^0) || usage
Multi-backend merge driver. The new command 'git merge' takes the current head and one or more remote heads, with the commit log message for the automated case. If the heads being merged are simple fast-forwards, it acts the same way as the current 'git resolve'. Otherwise, it tries different merge strategies and takes the result from the one that succeeded auto-merging, if there is any. If no merge strategy succeeds auto-merging, their results are evaluated for number of paths needed for hand resolving, and the one with the least number of such paths is left in the working tree. The user is asked to resolve them by hand and make a commit manually. The calling convention from the 'git merge' driver to merge strategy programs is very simple: - A strategy program is to be called 'git-merge-<strategy>'. - They take input of this form: <common1> <common2> ... '--' <head> <remote1> <remote2>... That is, one or more the common ancestors, double dash, the current head, and one or more remote heads being merged into the current branch. - Before a strategy program is called, the working tree is matched to the current <head>. - The strategy program exits with status code 0 when it successfully auto-merges the given heads. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths when it does so -- the index file will be used to record the merge result as a commit by the driver. - The strategy program exits with status code 1 when it leaves conflicts behind. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths that it successfully auto-merged, and leave the cache entry in the index file as the same as <head> for paths it could not auto-merge, and leave its best-effort result with conflict markers in the working tree when it does so. - The strategy program exists with status code other than 0 or 1 if it does not handle the given merge at all. As examples, this commit comes with merge strategies based on 'git resolve' and 'git octopus'. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
20 years ago
# All the rest are remote heads
test "$#" = 0 && usage ;# we need at least one remote head.
set_reflog_action "merge $*"
remoteheads=
Multi-backend merge driver. The new command 'git merge' takes the current head and one or more remote heads, with the commit log message for the automated case. If the heads being merged are simple fast-forwards, it acts the same way as the current 'git resolve'. Otherwise, it tries different merge strategies and takes the result from the one that succeeded auto-merging, if there is any. If no merge strategy succeeds auto-merging, their results are evaluated for number of paths needed for hand resolving, and the one with the least number of such paths is left in the working tree. The user is asked to resolve them by hand and make a commit manually. The calling convention from the 'git merge' driver to merge strategy programs is very simple: - A strategy program is to be called 'git-merge-<strategy>'. - They take input of this form: <common1> <common2> ... '--' <head> <remote1> <remote2>... That is, one or more the common ancestors, double dash, the current head, and one or more remote heads being merged into the current branch. - Before a strategy program is called, the working tree is matched to the current <head>. - The strategy program exits with status code 0 when it successfully auto-merges the given heads. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths when it does so -- the index file will be used to record the merge result as a commit by the driver. - The strategy program exits with status code 1 when it leaves conflicts behind. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths that it successfully auto-merged, and leave the cache entry in the index file as the same as <head> for paths it could not auto-merge, and leave its best-effort result with conflict markers in the working tree when it does so. - The strategy program exists with status code other than 0 or 1 if it does not handle the given merge at all. As examples, this commit comes with merge strategies based on 'git resolve' and 'git octopus'. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
20 years ago
for remote
do
remotehead=$(git rev-parse --verify "$remote"^0 2>/dev/null) ||
Multi-backend merge driver. The new command 'git merge' takes the current head and one or more remote heads, with the commit log message for the automated case. If the heads being merged are simple fast-forwards, it acts the same way as the current 'git resolve'. Otherwise, it tries different merge strategies and takes the result from the one that succeeded auto-merging, if there is any. If no merge strategy succeeds auto-merging, their results are evaluated for number of paths needed for hand resolving, and the one with the least number of such paths is left in the working tree. The user is asked to resolve them by hand and make a commit manually. The calling convention from the 'git merge' driver to merge strategy programs is very simple: - A strategy program is to be called 'git-merge-<strategy>'. - They take input of this form: <common1> <common2> ... '--' <head> <remote1> <remote2>... That is, one or more the common ancestors, double dash, the current head, and one or more remote heads being merged into the current branch. - Before a strategy program is called, the working tree is matched to the current <head>. - The strategy program exits with status code 0 when it successfully auto-merges the given heads. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths when it does so -- the index file will be used to record the merge result as a commit by the driver. - The strategy program exits with status code 1 when it leaves conflicts behind. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths that it successfully auto-merged, and leave the cache entry in the index file as the same as <head> for paths it could not auto-merge, and leave its best-effort result with conflict markers in the working tree when it does so. - The strategy program exists with status code other than 0 or 1 if it does not handle the given merge at all. As examples, this commit comes with merge strategies based on 'git resolve' and 'git octopus'. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
20 years ago
die "$remote - not something we can merge"
remoteheads="${remoteheads}$remotehead "
eval GITHEAD_$remotehead='"$remote"'
export GITHEAD_$remotehead
Multi-backend merge driver. The new command 'git merge' takes the current head and one or more remote heads, with the commit log message for the automated case. If the heads being merged are simple fast-forwards, it acts the same way as the current 'git resolve'. Otherwise, it tries different merge strategies and takes the result from the one that succeeded auto-merging, if there is any. If no merge strategy succeeds auto-merging, their results are evaluated for number of paths needed for hand resolving, and the one with the least number of such paths is left in the working tree. The user is asked to resolve them by hand and make a commit manually. The calling convention from the 'git merge' driver to merge strategy programs is very simple: - A strategy program is to be called 'git-merge-<strategy>'. - They take input of this form: <common1> <common2> ... '--' <head> <remote1> <remote2>... That is, one or more the common ancestors, double dash, the current head, and one or more remote heads being merged into the current branch. - Before a strategy program is called, the working tree is matched to the current <head>. - The strategy program exits with status code 0 when it successfully auto-merges the given heads. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths when it does so -- the index file will be used to record the merge result as a commit by the driver. - The strategy program exits with status code 1 when it leaves conflicts behind. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths that it successfully auto-merged, and leave the cache entry in the index file as the same as <head> for paths it could not auto-merge, and leave its best-effort result with conflict markers in the working tree when it does so. - The strategy program exists with status code other than 0 or 1 if it does not handle the given merge at all. As examples, this commit comes with merge strategies based on 'git resolve' and 'git octopus'. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
20 years ago
done
set x $remoteheads ; shift
Multi-backend merge driver. The new command 'git merge' takes the current head and one or more remote heads, with the commit log message for the automated case. If the heads being merged are simple fast-forwards, it acts the same way as the current 'git resolve'. Otherwise, it tries different merge strategies and takes the result from the one that succeeded auto-merging, if there is any. If no merge strategy succeeds auto-merging, their results are evaluated for number of paths needed for hand resolving, and the one with the least number of such paths is left in the working tree. The user is asked to resolve them by hand and make a commit manually. The calling convention from the 'git merge' driver to merge strategy programs is very simple: - A strategy program is to be called 'git-merge-<strategy>'. - They take input of this form: <common1> <common2> ... '--' <head> <remote1> <remote2>... That is, one or more the common ancestors, double dash, the current head, and one or more remote heads being merged into the current branch. - Before a strategy program is called, the working tree is matched to the current <head>. - The strategy program exits with status code 0 when it successfully auto-merges the given heads. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths when it does so -- the index file will be used to record the merge result as a commit by the driver. - The strategy program exits with status code 1 when it leaves conflicts behind. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths that it successfully auto-merged, and leave the cache entry in the index file as the same as <head> for paths it could not auto-merge, and leave its best-effort result with conflict markers in the working tree when it does so. - The strategy program exists with status code other than 0 or 1 if it does not handle the given merge at all. As examples, this commit comes with merge strategies based on 'git resolve' and 'git octopus'. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
20 years ago
case "$use_strategies" in
'')
case "$#" in
1)
var="`git config --get pull.twohead`"
if test -n "$var"
then
use_strategies="$var"
else
use_strategies="$default_twohead_strategies"
fi ;;
*)
var="`git config --get pull.octopus`"
if test -n "$var"
then
use_strategies="$var"
else
use_strategies="$default_octopus_strategies"
fi ;;
esac
;;
esac
for s in $use_strategies
do
for ss in $no_fast_forward_strategies
do
case " $s " in
*" $ss "*)
allow_fast_forward=f
break
;;
esac
done
for ss in $no_trivial_strategies
do
case " $s " in
*" $ss "*)
allow_trivial_merge=f
break
;;
esac
done
done
case "$#" in
1)
common=$(git merge-base --all $head "$@")
;;
*)
common=$(git show-branch --merge-base $head "$@")
;;
esac
Multi-backend merge driver. The new command 'git merge' takes the current head and one or more remote heads, with the commit log message for the automated case. If the heads being merged are simple fast-forwards, it acts the same way as the current 'git resolve'. Otherwise, it tries different merge strategies and takes the result from the one that succeeded auto-merging, if there is any. If no merge strategy succeeds auto-merging, their results are evaluated for number of paths needed for hand resolving, and the one with the least number of such paths is left in the working tree. The user is asked to resolve them by hand and make a commit manually. The calling convention from the 'git merge' driver to merge strategy programs is very simple: - A strategy program is to be called 'git-merge-<strategy>'. - They take input of this form: <common1> <common2> ... '--' <head> <remote1> <remote2>... That is, one or more the common ancestors, double dash, the current head, and one or more remote heads being merged into the current branch. - Before a strategy program is called, the working tree is matched to the current <head>. - The strategy program exits with status code 0 when it successfully auto-merges the given heads. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths when it does so -- the index file will be used to record the merge result as a commit by the driver. - The strategy program exits with status code 1 when it leaves conflicts behind. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths that it successfully auto-merged, and leave the cache entry in the index file as the same as <head> for paths it could not auto-merge, and leave its best-effort result with conflict markers in the working tree when it does so. - The strategy program exists with status code other than 0 or 1 if it does not handle the given merge at all. As examples, this commit comes with merge strategies based on 'git resolve' and 'git octopus'. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
20 years ago
echo "$head" >"$GIT_DIR/ORIG_HEAD"
case "$allow_fast_forward,$#,$common,$no_commit" in
?,*,'',*)
# No common ancestors found. We need a real merge.
Multi-backend merge driver. The new command 'git merge' takes the current head and one or more remote heads, with the commit log message for the automated case. If the heads being merged are simple fast-forwards, it acts the same way as the current 'git resolve'. Otherwise, it tries different merge strategies and takes the result from the one that succeeded auto-merging, if there is any. If no merge strategy succeeds auto-merging, their results are evaluated for number of paths needed for hand resolving, and the one with the least number of such paths is left in the working tree. The user is asked to resolve them by hand and make a commit manually. The calling convention from the 'git merge' driver to merge strategy programs is very simple: - A strategy program is to be called 'git-merge-<strategy>'. - They take input of this form: <common1> <common2> ... '--' <head> <remote1> <remote2>... That is, one or more the common ancestors, double dash, the current head, and one or more remote heads being merged into the current branch. - Before a strategy program is called, the working tree is matched to the current <head>. - The strategy program exits with status code 0 when it successfully auto-merges the given heads. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths when it does so -- the index file will be used to record the merge result as a commit by the driver. - The strategy program exits with status code 1 when it leaves conflicts behind. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths that it successfully auto-merged, and leave the cache entry in the index file as the same as <head> for paths it could not auto-merge, and leave its best-effort result with conflict markers in the working tree when it does so. - The strategy program exists with status code other than 0 or 1 if it does not handle the given merge at all. As examples, this commit comes with merge strategies based on 'git resolve' and 'git octopus'. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
20 years ago
;;
?,1,"$1",*)
Multi-backend merge driver. The new command 'git merge' takes the current head and one or more remote heads, with the commit log message for the automated case. If the heads being merged are simple fast-forwards, it acts the same way as the current 'git resolve'. Otherwise, it tries different merge strategies and takes the result from the one that succeeded auto-merging, if there is any. If no merge strategy succeeds auto-merging, their results are evaluated for number of paths needed for hand resolving, and the one with the least number of such paths is left in the working tree. The user is asked to resolve them by hand and make a commit manually. The calling convention from the 'git merge' driver to merge strategy programs is very simple: - A strategy program is to be called 'git-merge-<strategy>'. - They take input of this form: <common1> <common2> ... '--' <head> <remote1> <remote2>... That is, one or more the common ancestors, double dash, the current head, and one or more remote heads being merged into the current branch. - Before a strategy program is called, the working tree is matched to the current <head>. - The strategy program exits with status code 0 when it successfully auto-merges the given heads. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths when it does so -- the index file will be used to record the merge result as a commit by the driver. - The strategy program exits with status code 1 when it leaves conflicts behind. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths that it successfully auto-merged, and leave the cache entry in the index file as the same as <head> for paths it could not auto-merge, and leave its best-effort result with conflict markers in the working tree when it does so. - The strategy program exists with status code other than 0 or 1 if it does not handle the given merge at all. As examples, this commit comes with merge strategies based on 'git resolve' and 'git octopus'. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
20 years ago
# If head can reach all the merge then we are up to date.
# but first the most common case of merging one remote.
git-merge --squash Some people tend to do many little commits on a topic branch, recording all the trials and errors, and when the topic is reasonably cooked well, would want to record the net effect of the series as one commit on top of the mainline, removing the cruft from the history. The topic is then abandoned or forked off again from that point at the mainline. The barebone porcelainish that comes with core git tools does not officially support such operation, but you can fake it by using "git pull --no-merge" when such a topic branch is not a strict superset of the mainline, like this: git checkout mainline git pull --no-commit . that-topic-branch : fix conflicts if any rm -f .git/MERGE_HEAD git commit -a -m 'consolidated commit log message' git branch -f that-topic-branch ;# now fully merged This however does not work when the topic branch is a fast forward of the mainline, because normal "git pull" will never create a merge commit in such a case, and there is nothing special --no-commit could do to begin with. This patch introduces a new option, --squash, to support such a workflow officially in both fast-forward case and true merge case. The user-level operation would be the same in both cases: git checkout mainline git pull --squash . that-topic-branch : fix conflicts if any -- naturally, there would be : no conflict if fast forward. git commit -a -m 'consolidated commit log message' git branch -f that-topic-branch ;# now fully merged When the current branch is already up-to-date with respect to the other branch, there truly is nothing to do, so the new option does not have any effect. This was brought up in #git IRC channel recently. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
19 years ago
finish_up_to_date "Already up-to-date."
Multi-backend merge driver. The new command 'git merge' takes the current head and one or more remote heads, with the commit log message for the automated case. If the heads being merged are simple fast-forwards, it acts the same way as the current 'git resolve'. Otherwise, it tries different merge strategies and takes the result from the one that succeeded auto-merging, if there is any. If no merge strategy succeeds auto-merging, their results are evaluated for number of paths needed for hand resolving, and the one with the least number of such paths is left in the working tree. The user is asked to resolve them by hand and make a commit manually. The calling convention from the 'git merge' driver to merge strategy programs is very simple: - A strategy program is to be called 'git-merge-<strategy>'. - They take input of this form: <common1> <common2> ... '--' <head> <remote1> <remote2>... That is, one or more the common ancestors, double dash, the current head, and one or more remote heads being merged into the current branch. - Before a strategy program is called, the working tree is matched to the current <head>. - The strategy program exits with status code 0 when it successfully auto-merges the given heads. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths when it does so -- the index file will be used to record the merge result as a commit by the driver. - The strategy program exits with status code 1 when it leaves conflicts behind. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths that it successfully auto-merged, and leave the cache entry in the index file as the same as <head> for paths it could not auto-merge, and leave its best-effort result with conflict markers in the working tree when it does so. - The strategy program exists with status code other than 0 or 1 if it does not handle the given merge at all. As examples, this commit comes with merge strategies based on 'git resolve' and 'git octopus'. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
20 years ago
exit 0
;;
t,1,"$head",*)
Multi-backend merge driver. The new command 'git merge' takes the current head and one or more remote heads, with the commit log message for the automated case. If the heads being merged are simple fast-forwards, it acts the same way as the current 'git resolve'. Otherwise, it tries different merge strategies and takes the result from the one that succeeded auto-merging, if there is any. If no merge strategy succeeds auto-merging, their results are evaluated for number of paths needed for hand resolving, and the one with the least number of such paths is left in the working tree. The user is asked to resolve them by hand and make a commit manually. The calling convention from the 'git merge' driver to merge strategy programs is very simple: - A strategy program is to be called 'git-merge-<strategy>'. - They take input of this form: <common1> <common2> ... '--' <head> <remote1> <remote2>... That is, one or more the common ancestors, double dash, the current head, and one or more remote heads being merged into the current branch. - Before a strategy program is called, the working tree is matched to the current <head>. - The strategy program exits with status code 0 when it successfully auto-merges the given heads. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths when it does so -- the index file will be used to record the merge result as a commit by the driver. - The strategy program exits with status code 1 when it leaves conflicts behind. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths that it successfully auto-merged, and leave the cache entry in the index file as the same as <head> for paths it could not auto-merge, and leave its best-effort result with conflict markers in the working tree when it does so. - The strategy program exists with status code other than 0 or 1 if it does not handle the given merge at all. As examples, this commit comes with merge strategies based on 'git resolve' and 'git octopus'. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
20 years ago
# Again the most common case of merging one remote.
echo "Updating $(git rev-parse --short $head)..$(git rev-parse --short $1)"
git update-index --refresh 2>/dev/null
msg="Fast forward"
if test -n "$have_message"
then
msg="$msg (no commit created; -m option ignored)"
fi
new_head=$(git rev-parse --verify "$1^0") &&
git read-tree -v -m -u --exclude-per-directory=.gitignore $head "$new_head" &&
finish "$new_head" "$msg" || exit
dropsave
Multi-backend merge driver. The new command 'git merge' takes the current head and one or more remote heads, with the commit log message for the automated case. If the heads being merged are simple fast-forwards, it acts the same way as the current 'git resolve'. Otherwise, it tries different merge strategies and takes the result from the one that succeeded auto-merging, if there is any. If no merge strategy succeeds auto-merging, their results are evaluated for number of paths needed for hand resolving, and the one with the least number of such paths is left in the working tree. The user is asked to resolve them by hand and make a commit manually. The calling convention from the 'git merge' driver to merge strategy programs is very simple: - A strategy program is to be called 'git-merge-<strategy>'. - They take input of this form: <common1> <common2> ... '--' <head> <remote1> <remote2>... That is, one or more the common ancestors, double dash, the current head, and one or more remote heads being merged into the current branch. - Before a strategy program is called, the working tree is matched to the current <head>. - The strategy program exits with status code 0 when it successfully auto-merges the given heads. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths when it does so -- the index file will be used to record the merge result as a commit by the driver. - The strategy program exits with status code 1 when it leaves conflicts behind. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths that it successfully auto-merged, and leave the cache entry in the index file as the same as <head> for paths it could not auto-merge, and leave its best-effort result with conflict markers in the working tree when it does so. - The strategy program exists with status code other than 0 or 1 if it does not handle the given merge at all. As examples, this commit comes with merge strategies based on 'git resolve' and 'git octopus'. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
20 years ago
exit 0
;;
?,1,?*"$LF"?*,*)
Multi-backend merge driver. The new command 'git merge' takes the current head and one or more remote heads, with the commit log message for the automated case. If the heads being merged are simple fast-forwards, it acts the same way as the current 'git resolve'. Otherwise, it tries different merge strategies and takes the result from the one that succeeded auto-merging, if there is any. If no merge strategy succeeds auto-merging, their results are evaluated for number of paths needed for hand resolving, and the one with the least number of such paths is left in the working tree. The user is asked to resolve them by hand and make a commit manually. The calling convention from the 'git merge' driver to merge strategy programs is very simple: - A strategy program is to be called 'git-merge-<strategy>'. - They take input of this form: <common1> <common2> ... '--' <head> <remote1> <remote2>... That is, one or more the common ancestors, double dash, the current head, and one or more remote heads being merged into the current branch. - Before a strategy program is called, the working tree is matched to the current <head>. - The strategy program exits with status code 0 when it successfully auto-merges the given heads. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths when it does so -- the index file will be used to record the merge result as a commit by the driver. - The strategy program exits with status code 1 when it leaves conflicts behind. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths that it successfully auto-merged, and leave the cache entry in the index file as the same as <head> for paths it could not auto-merge, and leave its best-effort result with conflict markers in the working tree when it does so. - The strategy program exists with status code other than 0 or 1 if it does not handle the given merge at all. As examples, this commit comes with merge strategies based on 'git resolve' and 'git octopus'. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
20 years ago
# We are not doing octopus and not fast forward. Need a
# real merge.
;;
?,1,*,)
# We are not doing octopus, not fast forward, and have only
Improve merge performance by avoiding in-index merges. In the early days of Git we performed a 3-way read-tree based merge before attempting any specific merge strategy, as our core merge strategies of merge-one-file and merge-recursive were slower script based programs which took far longer to execute. This was a good performance optimization in the past, as most merges were able to be handled strictly by `read-tree -m -u`. However now that merge-recursive is a C based program which performs a full 3-way read-tree before it starts running we need to pay the cost of the 3-way read-tree twice if we have to do any sort of file level merging. This slows down some classes of simple merges which `read-tree -m -u` could not handle but which merge-recursive does automatically. For a really trivial merge which can be handled entirely by `read-tree -m -u`, skipping the read-tree and just going directly into merge-recursive saves on average 50 ms on my PowerPC G4 system. May sound odd, but it does appear to be true. In a really simple merge which needs to use merge-recursive to handle a file that was modified on both branches, skipping the read-tree in git-merge saves on average almost 100 ms (on the same PowerPC G4) as we avoid doing some work twice. We only avoid `read-tree -m -u` if the only strategy to use is merge-recursive, as not all merge strategies perform as well as merge-recursive does. Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
18 years ago
# one common.
git update-index --refresh 2>/dev/null
case "$allow_trivial_merge" in
t)
Improve merge performance by avoiding in-index merges. In the early days of Git we performed a 3-way read-tree based merge before attempting any specific merge strategy, as our core merge strategies of merge-one-file and merge-recursive were slower script based programs which took far longer to execute. This was a good performance optimization in the past, as most merges were able to be handled strictly by `read-tree -m -u`. However now that merge-recursive is a C based program which performs a full 3-way read-tree before it starts running we need to pay the cost of the 3-way read-tree twice if we have to do any sort of file level merging. This slows down some classes of simple merges which `read-tree -m -u` could not handle but which merge-recursive does automatically. For a really trivial merge which can be handled entirely by `read-tree -m -u`, skipping the read-tree and just going directly into merge-recursive saves on average 50 ms on my PowerPC G4 system. May sound odd, but it does appear to be true. In a really simple merge which needs to use merge-recursive to handle a file that was modified on both branches, skipping the read-tree in git-merge saves on average almost 100 ms (on the same PowerPC G4) as we avoid doing some work twice. We only avoid `read-tree -m -u` if the only strategy to use is merge-recursive, as not all merge strategies perform as well as merge-recursive does. Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
18 years ago
# See if it is really trivial.
git var GIT_COMMITTER_IDENT >/dev/null || exit
echo "Trying really trivial in-index merge..."
if git read-tree --trivial -m -u -v $common $head "$1" &&
result_tree=$(git write-tree)
Improve merge performance by avoiding in-index merges. In the early days of Git we performed a 3-way read-tree based merge before attempting any specific merge strategy, as our core merge strategies of merge-one-file and merge-recursive were slower script based programs which took far longer to execute. This was a good performance optimization in the past, as most merges were able to be handled strictly by `read-tree -m -u`. However now that merge-recursive is a C based program which performs a full 3-way read-tree before it starts running we need to pay the cost of the 3-way read-tree twice if we have to do any sort of file level merging. This slows down some classes of simple merges which `read-tree -m -u` could not handle but which merge-recursive does automatically. For a really trivial merge which can be handled entirely by `read-tree -m -u`, skipping the read-tree and just going directly into merge-recursive saves on average 50 ms on my PowerPC G4 system. May sound odd, but it does appear to be true. In a really simple merge which needs to use merge-recursive to handle a file that was modified on both branches, skipping the read-tree in git-merge saves on average almost 100 ms (on the same PowerPC G4) as we avoid doing some work twice. We only avoid `read-tree -m -u` if the only strategy to use is merge-recursive, as not all merge strategies perform as well as merge-recursive does. Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
18 years ago
then
echo "Wonderful."
result_commit=$(
printf '%s\n' "$merge_msg" |
git commit-tree $result_tree -p HEAD -p "$1"
Improve merge performance by avoiding in-index merges. In the early days of Git we performed a 3-way read-tree based merge before attempting any specific merge strategy, as our core merge strategies of merge-one-file and merge-recursive were slower script based programs which took far longer to execute. This was a good performance optimization in the past, as most merges were able to be handled strictly by `read-tree -m -u`. However now that merge-recursive is a C based program which performs a full 3-way read-tree before it starts running we need to pay the cost of the 3-way read-tree twice if we have to do any sort of file level merging. This slows down some classes of simple merges which `read-tree -m -u` could not handle but which merge-recursive does automatically. For a really trivial merge which can be handled entirely by `read-tree -m -u`, skipping the read-tree and just going directly into merge-recursive saves on average 50 ms on my PowerPC G4 system. May sound odd, but it does appear to be true. In a really simple merge which needs to use merge-recursive to handle a file that was modified on both branches, skipping the read-tree in git-merge saves on average almost 100 ms (on the same PowerPC G4) as we avoid doing some work twice. We only avoid `read-tree -m -u` if the only strategy to use is merge-recursive, as not all merge strategies perform as well as merge-recursive does. Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
18 years ago
) || exit
finish "$result_commit" "In-index merge"
dropsave
exit 0
fi
echo "Nope."
esac
;;
Multi-backend merge driver. The new command 'git merge' takes the current head and one or more remote heads, with the commit log message for the automated case. If the heads being merged are simple fast-forwards, it acts the same way as the current 'git resolve'. Otherwise, it tries different merge strategies and takes the result from the one that succeeded auto-merging, if there is any. If no merge strategy succeeds auto-merging, their results are evaluated for number of paths needed for hand resolving, and the one with the least number of such paths is left in the working tree. The user is asked to resolve them by hand and make a commit manually. The calling convention from the 'git merge' driver to merge strategy programs is very simple: - A strategy program is to be called 'git-merge-<strategy>'. - They take input of this form: <common1> <common2> ... '--' <head> <remote1> <remote2>... That is, one or more the common ancestors, double dash, the current head, and one or more remote heads being merged into the current branch. - Before a strategy program is called, the working tree is matched to the current <head>. - The strategy program exits with status code 0 when it successfully auto-merges the given heads. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths when it does so -- the index file will be used to record the merge result as a commit by the driver. - The strategy program exits with status code 1 when it leaves conflicts behind. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths that it successfully auto-merged, and leave the cache entry in the index file as the same as <head> for paths it could not auto-merge, and leave its best-effort result with conflict markers in the working tree when it does so. - The strategy program exists with status code other than 0 or 1 if it does not handle the given merge at all. As examples, this commit comes with merge strategies based on 'git resolve' and 'git octopus'. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
20 years ago
*)
# An octopus. If we can reach all the remote we are up to date.
up_to_date=t
for remote
do
common_one=$(git merge-base --all $head $remote)
Multi-backend merge driver. The new command 'git merge' takes the current head and one or more remote heads, with the commit log message for the automated case. If the heads being merged are simple fast-forwards, it acts the same way as the current 'git resolve'. Otherwise, it tries different merge strategies and takes the result from the one that succeeded auto-merging, if there is any. If no merge strategy succeeds auto-merging, their results are evaluated for number of paths needed for hand resolving, and the one with the least number of such paths is left in the working tree. The user is asked to resolve them by hand and make a commit manually. The calling convention from the 'git merge' driver to merge strategy programs is very simple: - A strategy program is to be called 'git-merge-<strategy>'. - They take input of this form: <common1> <common2> ... '--' <head> <remote1> <remote2>... That is, one or more the common ancestors, double dash, the current head, and one or more remote heads being merged into the current branch. - Before a strategy program is called, the working tree is matched to the current <head>. - The strategy program exits with status code 0 when it successfully auto-merges the given heads. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths when it does so -- the index file will be used to record the merge result as a commit by the driver. - The strategy program exits with status code 1 when it leaves conflicts behind. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths that it successfully auto-merged, and leave the cache entry in the index file as the same as <head> for paths it could not auto-merge, and leave its best-effort result with conflict markers in the working tree when it does so. - The strategy program exists with status code other than 0 or 1 if it does not handle the given merge at all. As examples, this commit comes with merge strategies based on 'git resolve' and 'git octopus'. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
20 years ago
if test "$common_one" != "$remote"
then
up_to_date=f
break
fi
done
if test "$up_to_date" = t
then
git-merge --squash Some people tend to do many little commits on a topic branch, recording all the trials and errors, and when the topic is reasonably cooked well, would want to record the net effect of the series as one commit on top of the mainline, removing the cruft from the history. The topic is then abandoned or forked off again from that point at the mainline. The barebone porcelainish that comes with core git tools does not officially support such operation, but you can fake it by using "git pull --no-merge" when such a topic branch is not a strict superset of the mainline, like this: git checkout mainline git pull --no-commit . that-topic-branch : fix conflicts if any rm -f .git/MERGE_HEAD git commit -a -m 'consolidated commit log message' git branch -f that-topic-branch ;# now fully merged This however does not work when the topic branch is a fast forward of the mainline, because normal "git pull" will never create a merge commit in such a case, and there is nothing special --no-commit could do to begin with. This patch introduces a new option, --squash, to support such a workflow officially in both fast-forward case and true merge case. The user-level operation would be the same in both cases: git checkout mainline git pull --squash . that-topic-branch : fix conflicts if any -- naturally, there would be : no conflict if fast forward. git commit -a -m 'consolidated commit log message' git branch -f that-topic-branch ;# now fully merged When the current branch is already up-to-date with respect to the other branch, there truly is nothing to do, so the new option does not have any effect. This was brought up in #git IRC channel recently. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
19 years ago
finish_up_to_date "Already up-to-date. Yeeah!"
Multi-backend merge driver. The new command 'git merge' takes the current head and one or more remote heads, with the commit log message for the automated case. If the heads being merged are simple fast-forwards, it acts the same way as the current 'git resolve'. Otherwise, it tries different merge strategies and takes the result from the one that succeeded auto-merging, if there is any. If no merge strategy succeeds auto-merging, their results are evaluated for number of paths needed for hand resolving, and the one with the least number of such paths is left in the working tree. The user is asked to resolve them by hand and make a commit manually. The calling convention from the 'git merge' driver to merge strategy programs is very simple: - A strategy program is to be called 'git-merge-<strategy>'. - They take input of this form: <common1> <common2> ... '--' <head> <remote1> <remote2>... That is, one or more the common ancestors, double dash, the current head, and one or more remote heads being merged into the current branch. - Before a strategy program is called, the working tree is matched to the current <head>. - The strategy program exits with status code 0 when it successfully auto-merges the given heads. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths when it does so -- the index file will be used to record the merge result as a commit by the driver. - The strategy program exits with status code 1 when it leaves conflicts behind. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths that it successfully auto-merged, and leave the cache entry in the index file as the same as <head> for paths it could not auto-merge, and leave its best-effort result with conflict markers in the working tree when it does so. - The strategy program exists with status code other than 0 or 1 if it does not handle the given merge at all. As examples, this commit comes with merge strategies based on 'git resolve' and 'git octopus'. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
20 years ago
exit 0
fi
;;
esac
# We are going to make a new commit.
git var GIT_COMMITTER_IDENT >/dev/null || exit
# At this point, we need a real merge. No matter what strategy
# we use, it would operate on the index, possibly affecting the
# working tree, and when resolved cleanly, have the desired tree
# in the index -- this means that the index must be in sync with
# the $head commit. The strategies are responsible to ensure this.
Multi-backend merge driver. The new command 'git merge' takes the current head and one or more remote heads, with the commit log message for the automated case. If the heads being merged are simple fast-forwards, it acts the same way as the current 'git resolve'. Otherwise, it tries different merge strategies and takes the result from the one that succeeded auto-merging, if there is any. If no merge strategy succeeds auto-merging, their results are evaluated for number of paths needed for hand resolving, and the one with the least number of such paths is left in the working tree. The user is asked to resolve them by hand and make a commit manually. The calling convention from the 'git merge' driver to merge strategy programs is very simple: - A strategy program is to be called 'git-merge-<strategy>'. - They take input of this form: <common1> <common2> ... '--' <head> <remote1> <remote2>... That is, one or more the common ancestors, double dash, the current head, and one or more remote heads being merged into the current branch. - Before a strategy program is called, the working tree is matched to the current <head>. - The strategy program exits with status code 0 when it successfully auto-merges the given heads. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths when it does so -- the index file will be used to record the merge result as a commit by the driver. - The strategy program exits with status code 1 when it leaves conflicts behind. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths that it successfully auto-merged, and leave the cache entry in the index file as the same as <head> for paths it could not auto-merge, and leave its best-effort result with conflict markers in the working tree when it does so. - The strategy program exists with status code other than 0 or 1 if it does not handle the given merge at all. As examples, this commit comes with merge strategies based on 'git resolve' and 'git octopus'. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
20 years ago
case "$use_strategies" in
?*' '?*)
# Stash away the local changes so that we can try more than one.
savestate
single_strategy=no
;;
*)
rm -f "$GIT_DIR/MERGE_SAVE"
single_strategy=yes
;;
esac
Multi-backend merge driver. The new command 'git merge' takes the current head and one or more remote heads, with the commit log message for the automated case. If the heads being merged are simple fast-forwards, it acts the same way as the current 'git resolve'. Otherwise, it tries different merge strategies and takes the result from the one that succeeded auto-merging, if there is any. If no merge strategy succeeds auto-merging, their results are evaluated for number of paths needed for hand resolving, and the one with the least number of such paths is left in the working tree. The user is asked to resolve them by hand and make a commit manually. The calling convention from the 'git merge' driver to merge strategy programs is very simple: - A strategy program is to be called 'git-merge-<strategy>'. - They take input of this form: <common1> <common2> ... '--' <head> <remote1> <remote2>... That is, one or more the common ancestors, double dash, the current head, and one or more remote heads being merged into the current branch. - Before a strategy program is called, the working tree is matched to the current <head>. - The strategy program exits with status code 0 when it successfully auto-merges the given heads. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths when it does so -- the index file will be used to record the merge result as a commit by the driver. - The strategy program exits with status code 1 when it leaves conflicts behind. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths that it successfully auto-merged, and leave the cache entry in the index file as the same as <head> for paths it could not auto-merge, and leave its best-effort result with conflict markers in the working tree when it does so. - The strategy program exists with status code other than 0 or 1 if it does not handle the given merge at all. As examples, this commit comes with merge strategies based on 'git resolve' and 'git octopus'. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
20 years ago
result_tree= best_cnt=-1 best_strategy= wt_strategy=
merge_was_ok=
Multi-backend merge driver. The new command 'git merge' takes the current head and one or more remote heads, with the commit log message for the automated case. If the heads being merged are simple fast-forwards, it acts the same way as the current 'git resolve'. Otherwise, it tries different merge strategies and takes the result from the one that succeeded auto-merging, if there is any. If no merge strategy succeeds auto-merging, their results are evaluated for number of paths needed for hand resolving, and the one with the least number of such paths is left in the working tree. The user is asked to resolve them by hand and make a commit manually. The calling convention from the 'git merge' driver to merge strategy programs is very simple: - A strategy program is to be called 'git-merge-<strategy>'. - They take input of this form: <common1> <common2> ... '--' <head> <remote1> <remote2>... That is, one or more the common ancestors, double dash, the current head, and one or more remote heads being merged into the current branch. - Before a strategy program is called, the working tree is matched to the current <head>. - The strategy program exits with status code 0 when it successfully auto-merges the given heads. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths when it does so -- the index file will be used to record the merge result as a commit by the driver. - The strategy program exits with status code 1 when it leaves conflicts behind. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths that it successfully auto-merged, and leave the cache entry in the index file as the same as <head> for paths it could not auto-merge, and leave its best-effort result with conflict markers in the working tree when it does so. - The strategy program exists with status code other than 0 or 1 if it does not handle the given merge at all. As examples, this commit comes with merge strategies based on 'git resolve' and 'git octopus'. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
20 years ago
for strategy in $use_strategies
do
test "$wt_strategy" = '' || {
echo "Rewinding the tree to pristine..."
restorestate
Multi-backend merge driver. The new command 'git merge' takes the current head and one or more remote heads, with the commit log message for the automated case. If the heads being merged are simple fast-forwards, it acts the same way as the current 'git resolve'. Otherwise, it tries different merge strategies and takes the result from the one that succeeded auto-merging, if there is any. If no merge strategy succeeds auto-merging, their results are evaluated for number of paths needed for hand resolving, and the one with the least number of such paths is left in the working tree. The user is asked to resolve them by hand and make a commit manually. The calling convention from the 'git merge' driver to merge strategy programs is very simple: - A strategy program is to be called 'git-merge-<strategy>'. - They take input of this form: <common1> <common2> ... '--' <head> <remote1> <remote2>... That is, one or more the common ancestors, double dash, the current head, and one or more remote heads being merged into the current branch. - Before a strategy program is called, the working tree is matched to the current <head>. - The strategy program exits with status code 0 when it successfully auto-merges the given heads. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths when it does so -- the index file will be used to record the merge result as a commit by the driver. - The strategy program exits with status code 1 when it leaves conflicts behind. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths that it successfully auto-merged, and leave the cache entry in the index file as the same as <head> for paths it could not auto-merge, and leave its best-effort result with conflict markers in the working tree when it does so. - The strategy program exists with status code other than 0 or 1 if it does not handle the given merge at all. As examples, this commit comes with merge strategies based on 'git resolve' and 'git octopus'. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
20 years ago
}
case "$single_strategy" in
no)
echo "Trying merge strategy $strategy..."
;;
esac
# Remember which strategy left the state in the working tree
Multi-backend merge driver. The new command 'git merge' takes the current head and one or more remote heads, with the commit log message for the automated case. If the heads being merged are simple fast-forwards, it acts the same way as the current 'git resolve'. Otherwise, it tries different merge strategies and takes the result from the one that succeeded auto-merging, if there is any. If no merge strategy succeeds auto-merging, their results are evaluated for number of paths needed for hand resolving, and the one with the least number of such paths is left in the working tree. The user is asked to resolve them by hand and make a commit manually. The calling convention from the 'git merge' driver to merge strategy programs is very simple: - A strategy program is to be called 'git-merge-<strategy>'. - They take input of this form: <common1> <common2> ... '--' <head> <remote1> <remote2>... That is, one or more the common ancestors, double dash, the current head, and one or more remote heads being merged into the current branch. - Before a strategy program is called, the working tree is matched to the current <head>. - The strategy program exits with status code 0 when it successfully auto-merges the given heads. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths when it does so -- the index file will be used to record the merge result as a commit by the driver. - The strategy program exits with status code 1 when it leaves conflicts behind. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths that it successfully auto-merged, and leave the cache entry in the index file as the same as <head> for paths it could not auto-merge, and leave its best-effort result with conflict markers in the working tree when it does so. - The strategy program exists with status code other than 0 or 1 if it does not handle the given merge at all. As examples, this commit comes with merge strategies based on 'git resolve' and 'git octopus'. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
20 years ago
wt_strategy=$strategy
git-merge-$strategy $common -- "$head_arg" "$@"
exit=$?
if test "$no_commit" = t && test "$exit" = 0
then
merge_was_ok=t
exit=1 ;# pretend it left conflicts.
fi
test "$exit" = 0 || {
Multi-backend merge driver. The new command 'git merge' takes the current head and one or more remote heads, with the commit log message for the automated case. If the heads being merged are simple fast-forwards, it acts the same way as the current 'git resolve'. Otherwise, it tries different merge strategies and takes the result from the one that succeeded auto-merging, if there is any. If no merge strategy succeeds auto-merging, their results are evaluated for number of paths needed for hand resolving, and the one with the least number of such paths is left in the working tree. The user is asked to resolve them by hand and make a commit manually. The calling convention from the 'git merge' driver to merge strategy programs is very simple: - A strategy program is to be called 'git-merge-<strategy>'. - They take input of this form: <common1> <common2> ... '--' <head> <remote1> <remote2>... That is, one or more the common ancestors, double dash, the current head, and one or more remote heads being merged into the current branch. - Before a strategy program is called, the working tree is matched to the current <head>. - The strategy program exits with status code 0 when it successfully auto-merges the given heads. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths when it does so -- the index file will be used to record the merge result as a commit by the driver. - The strategy program exits with status code 1 when it leaves conflicts behind. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths that it successfully auto-merged, and leave the cache entry in the index file as the same as <head> for paths it could not auto-merge, and leave its best-effort result with conflict markers in the working tree when it does so. - The strategy program exists with status code other than 0 or 1 if it does not handle the given merge at all. As examples, this commit comes with merge strategies based on 'git resolve' and 'git octopus'. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
20 years ago
# The backend exits with 1 when conflicts are left to be resolved,
# with 2 when it does not handle the given merge at all.
if test "$exit" -eq 1
then
cnt=`{
git diff-files --name-only
git ls-files --unmerged
Multi-backend merge driver. The new command 'git merge' takes the current head and one or more remote heads, with the commit log message for the automated case. If the heads being merged are simple fast-forwards, it acts the same way as the current 'git resolve'. Otherwise, it tries different merge strategies and takes the result from the one that succeeded auto-merging, if there is any. If no merge strategy succeeds auto-merging, their results are evaluated for number of paths needed for hand resolving, and the one with the least number of such paths is left in the working tree. The user is asked to resolve them by hand and make a commit manually. The calling convention from the 'git merge' driver to merge strategy programs is very simple: - A strategy program is to be called 'git-merge-<strategy>'. - They take input of this form: <common1> <common2> ... '--' <head> <remote1> <remote2>... That is, one or more the common ancestors, double dash, the current head, and one or more remote heads being merged into the current branch. - Before a strategy program is called, the working tree is matched to the current <head>. - The strategy program exits with status code 0 when it successfully auto-merges the given heads. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths when it does so -- the index file will be used to record the merge result as a commit by the driver. - The strategy program exits with status code 1 when it leaves conflicts behind. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths that it successfully auto-merged, and leave the cache entry in the index file as the same as <head> for paths it could not auto-merge, and leave its best-effort result with conflict markers in the working tree when it does so. - The strategy program exists with status code other than 0 or 1 if it does not handle the given merge at all. As examples, this commit comes with merge strategies based on 'git resolve' and 'git octopus'. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
20 years ago
} | wc -l`
if test $best_cnt -le 0 -o $cnt -le $best_cnt
then
best_strategy=$strategy
best_cnt=$cnt
fi
fi
continue
}
# Automerge succeeded.
result_tree=$(git write-tree) && break
Multi-backend merge driver. The new command 'git merge' takes the current head and one or more remote heads, with the commit log message for the automated case. If the heads being merged are simple fast-forwards, it acts the same way as the current 'git resolve'. Otherwise, it tries different merge strategies and takes the result from the one that succeeded auto-merging, if there is any. If no merge strategy succeeds auto-merging, their results are evaluated for number of paths needed for hand resolving, and the one with the least number of such paths is left in the working tree. The user is asked to resolve them by hand and make a commit manually. The calling convention from the 'git merge' driver to merge strategy programs is very simple: - A strategy program is to be called 'git-merge-<strategy>'. - They take input of this form: <common1> <common2> ... '--' <head> <remote1> <remote2>... That is, one or more the common ancestors, double dash, the current head, and one or more remote heads being merged into the current branch. - Before a strategy program is called, the working tree is matched to the current <head>. - The strategy program exits with status code 0 when it successfully auto-merges the given heads. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths when it does so -- the index file will be used to record the merge result as a commit by the driver. - The strategy program exits with status code 1 when it leaves conflicts behind. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths that it successfully auto-merged, and leave the cache entry in the index file as the same as <head> for paths it could not auto-merge, and leave its best-effort result with conflict markers in the working tree when it does so. - The strategy program exists with status code other than 0 or 1 if it does not handle the given merge at all. As examples, this commit comes with merge strategies based on 'git resolve' and 'git octopus'. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
20 years ago
done
# If we have a resulting tree, that means the strategy module
# auto resolved the merge cleanly.
if test '' != "$result_tree"
then
parents=$(git show-branch --independent "$head" "$@" | sed -e 's/^/-p /')
result_commit=$(printf '%s\n' "$merge_msg" | git commit-tree $result_tree $parents) || exit
finish "$result_commit" "Merge made by $wt_strategy."
dropsave
Multi-backend merge driver. The new command 'git merge' takes the current head and one or more remote heads, with the commit log message for the automated case. If the heads being merged are simple fast-forwards, it acts the same way as the current 'git resolve'. Otherwise, it tries different merge strategies and takes the result from the one that succeeded auto-merging, if there is any. If no merge strategy succeeds auto-merging, their results are evaluated for number of paths needed for hand resolving, and the one with the least number of such paths is left in the working tree. The user is asked to resolve them by hand and make a commit manually. The calling convention from the 'git merge' driver to merge strategy programs is very simple: - A strategy program is to be called 'git-merge-<strategy>'. - They take input of this form: <common1> <common2> ... '--' <head> <remote1> <remote2>... That is, one or more the common ancestors, double dash, the current head, and one or more remote heads being merged into the current branch. - Before a strategy program is called, the working tree is matched to the current <head>. - The strategy program exits with status code 0 when it successfully auto-merges the given heads. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths when it does so -- the index file will be used to record the merge result as a commit by the driver. - The strategy program exits with status code 1 when it leaves conflicts behind. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths that it successfully auto-merged, and leave the cache entry in the index file as the same as <head> for paths it could not auto-merge, and leave its best-effort result with conflict markers in the working tree when it does so. - The strategy program exists with status code other than 0 or 1 if it does not handle the given merge at all. As examples, this commit comes with merge strategies based on 'git resolve' and 'git octopus'. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
20 years ago
exit 0
fi
# Pick the result from the best strategy and have the user fix it up.
case "$best_strategy" in
'')
restorestate
case "$use_strategies" in
?*' '?*)
echo >&2 "No merge strategy handled the merge."
;;
*)
echo >&2 "Merge with strategy $use_strategies failed."
;;
esac
exit 2
Multi-backend merge driver. The new command 'git merge' takes the current head and one or more remote heads, with the commit log message for the automated case. If the heads being merged are simple fast-forwards, it acts the same way as the current 'git resolve'. Otherwise, it tries different merge strategies and takes the result from the one that succeeded auto-merging, if there is any. If no merge strategy succeeds auto-merging, their results are evaluated for number of paths needed for hand resolving, and the one with the least number of such paths is left in the working tree. The user is asked to resolve them by hand and make a commit manually. The calling convention from the 'git merge' driver to merge strategy programs is very simple: - A strategy program is to be called 'git-merge-<strategy>'. - They take input of this form: <common1> <common2> ... '--' <head> <remote1> <remote2>... That is, one or more the common ancestors, double dash, the current head, and one or more remote heads being merged into the current branch. - Before a strategy program is called, the working tree is matched to the current <head>. - The strategy program exits with status code 0 when it successfully auto-merges the given heads. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths when it does so -- the index file will be used to record the merge result as a commit by the driver. - The strategy program exits with status code 1 when it leaves conflicts behind. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths that it successfully auto-merged, and leave the cache entry in the index file as the same as <head> for paths it could not auto-merge, and leave its best-effort result with conflict markers in the working tree when it does so. - The strategy program exists with status code other than 0 or 1 if it does not handle the given merge at all. As examples, this commit comes with merge strategies based on 'git resolve' and 'git octopus'. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
20 years ago
;;
"$wt_strategy")
# We already have its result in the working tree.
;;
*)
echo "Rewinding the tree to pristine..."
restorestate
Multi-backend merge driver. The new command 'git merge' takes the current head and one or more remote heads, with the commit log message for the automated case. If the heads being merged are simple fast-forwards, it acts the same way as the current 'git resolve'. Otherwise, it tries different merge strategies and takes the result from the one that succeeded auto-merging, if there is any. If no merge strategy succeeds auto-merging, their results are evaluated for number of paths needed for hand resolving, and the one with the least number of such paths is left in the working tree. The user is asked to resolve them by hand and make a commit manually. The calling convention from the 'git merge' driver to merge strategy programs is very simple: - A strategy program is to be called 'git-merge-<strategy>'. - They take input of this form: <common1> <common2> ... '--' <head> <remote1> <remote2>... That is, one or more the common ancestors, double dash, the current head, and one or more remote heads being merged into the current branch. - Before a strategy program is called, the working tree is matched to the current <head>. - The strategy program exits with status code 0 when it successfully auto-merges the given heads. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths when it does so -- the index file will be used to record the merge result as a commit by the driver. - The strategy program exits with status code 1 when it leaves conflicts behind. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths that it successfully auto-merged, and leave the cache entry in the index file as the same as <head> for paths it could not auto-merge, and leave its best-effort result with conflict markers in the working tree when it does so. - The strategy program exists with status code other than 0 or 1 if it does not handle the given merge at all. As examples, this commit comes with merge strategies based on 'git resolve' and 'git octopus'. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
20 years ago
echo "Using the $best_strategy to prepare resolving by hand."
git-merge-$best_strategy $common -- "$head_arg" "$@"
Multi-backend merge driver. The new command 'git merge' takes the current head and one or more remote heads, with the commit log message for the automated case. If the heads being merged are simple fast-forwards, it acts the same way as the current 'git resolve'. Otherwise, it tries different merge strategies and takes the result from the one that succeeded auto-merging, if there is any. If no merge strategy succeeds auto-merging, their results are evaluated for number of paths needed for hand resolving, and the one with the least number of such paths is left in the working tree. The user is asked to resolve them by hand and make a commit manually. The calling convention from the 'git merge' driver to merge strategy programs is very simple: - A strategy program is to be called 'git-merge-<strategy>'. - They take input of this form: <common1> <common2> ... '--' <head> <remote1> <remote2>... That is, one or more the common ancestors, double dash, the current head, and one or more remote heads being merged into the current branch. - Before a strategy program is called, the working tree is matched to the current <head>. - The strategy program exits with status code 0 when it successfully auto-merges the given heads. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths when it does so -- the index file will be used to record the merge result as a commit by the driver. - The strategy program exits with status code 1 when it leaves conflicts behind. It should do update-cache for all the merged paths that it successfully auto-merged, and leave the cache entry in the index file as the same as <head> for paths it could not auto-merge, and leave its best-effort result with conflict markers in the working tree when it does so. - The strategy program exists with status code other than 0 or 1 if it does not handle the given merge at all. As examples, this commit comes with merge strategies based on 'git resolve' and 'git octopus'. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
20 years ago
;;
esac
git-merge --squash Some people tend to do many little commits on a topic branch, recording all the trials and errors, and when the topic is reasonably cooked well, would want to record the net effect of the series as one commit on top of the mainline, removing the cruft from the history. The topic is then abandoned or forked off again from that point at the mainline. The barebone porcelainish that comes with core git tools does not officially support such operation, but you can fake it by using "git pull --no-merge" when such a topic branch is not a strict superset of the mainline, like this: git checkout mainline git pull --no-commit . that-topic-branch : fix conflicts if any rm -f .git/MERGE_HEAD git commit -a -m 'consolidated commit log message' git branch -f that-topic-branch ;# now fully merged This however does not work when the topic branch is a fast forward of the mainline, because normal "git pull" will never create a merge commit in such a case, and there is nothing special --no-commit could do to begin with. This patch introduces a new option, --squash, to support such a workflow officially in both fast-forward case and true merge case. The user-level operation would be the same in both cases: git checkout mainline git pull --squash . that-topic-branch : fix conflicts if any -- naturally, there would be : no conflict if fast forward. git commit -a -m 'consolidated commit log message' git branch -f that-topic-branch ;# now fully merged When the current branch is already up-to-date with respect to the other branch, there truly is nothing to do, so the new option does not have any effect. This was brought up in #git IRC channel recently. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
19 years ago
if test "$squash" = t
then
finish
else
for remote
do
echo $remote
done >"$GIT_DIR/MERGE_HEAD"
printf '%s\n' "$merge_msg" >"$GIT_DIR/MERGE_MSG"
git-merge --squash Some people tend to do many little commits on a topic branch, recording all the trials and errors, and when the topic is reasonably cooked well, would want to record the net effect of the series as one commit on top of the mainline, removing the cruft from the history. The topic is then abandoned or forked off again from that point at the mainline. The barebone porcelainish that comes with core git tools does not officially support such operation, but you can fake it by using "git pull --no-merge" when such a topic branch is not a strict superset of the mainline, like this: git checkout mainline git pull --no-commit . that-topic-branch : fix conflicts if any rm -f .git/MERGE_HEAD git commit -a -m 'consolidated commit log message' git branch -f that-topic-branch ;# now fully merged This however does not work when the topic branch is a fast forward of the mainline, because normal "git pull" will never create a merge commit in such a case, and there is nothing special --no-commit could do to begin with. This patch introduces a new option, --squash, to support such a workflow officially in both fast-forward case and true merge case. The user-level operation would be the same in both cases: git checkout mainline git pull --squash . that-topic-branch : fix conflicts if any -- naturally, there would be : no conflict if fast forward. git commit -a -m 'consolidated commit log message' git branch -f that-topic-branch ;# now fully merged When the current branch is already up-to-date with respect to the other branch, there truly is nothing to do, so the new option does not have any effect. This was brought up in #git IRC channel recently. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
19 years ago
fi
if test "$merge_was_ok" = t
then
echo >&2 \
"Automatic merge went well; stopped before committing as requested"
exit 0
else
{
echo '
Conflicts:
'
git ls-files --unmerged |
sed -e 's/^[^ ]* / /' |
uniq
} >>"$GIT_DIR/MERGE_MSG"
git rerere
die "Automatic merge failed; fix conflicts and then commit the result."
fi