rebase supports --strategy, so pull should pass the option along to it.
Signed-off-by: Jay Soffian <jaysoffian@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
When the upstream branch is tracked, we can detect if that branch
was rebased since it was last fetched. Teach git to use that
information to rebase from the old remote head onto the new remote head.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
When "git pull --tags" is run without any other arguments, the
standard error message "You told me to fetch and merge stuff but
there is nothing to merge! You might want to fix your config"
is given.
While the error may be technically correct, fixing the config
would not help, as "git pull --tags" itself tells "git fetch"
not to use the configured refspecs.
This commit makes "git pull --tags" to issue a different error
message to avoid confusion. This is merely an interim solution.
In the longer term, it would be a better approach to change the
semantics of --tags option to make "git fetch" and "git pull"
to:
(1) behave as if no --tags was given (so an explicit refspec on
the command line overrides configured ones, or no explicit
refspecs on the command line takes configured ones); but
(2) no auto-following of tags is made even when using
configured refspecs; and
(3) fetch all tags as not-for-merge entries".
Then we would not need to have this separate error message, as
the ordinary merge will happen even with the --tags option.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
When calling 'git pull' with the '--rebase' option, it performs a
fetch + rebase instead of a fetch + merge.
This behavior is more desirable than fetch + pull when a topic branch
is ready to be submitted and needs to be update.
fetch + rebase might also be considered a better workflow with shared
repositories in any case, or for contributors to a centrally managed
repository, such as WINE's.
As a convenience, you can set the default behavior for a branch by
defining the config variable branch.<name>.rebase, which is
interpreted as a bool. This setting can be overridden on the command
line by --rebase and --no-rebase.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
--text follows this line--
These commands currently lack OPTIONS_SPEC; allow people to
easily list with "git grep 'OPTIONS_SPEC=$'" what they can help
improving.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
These options are supported by git-merge, but git-pull didn't know about
them.
Signed-off-by: Lars Hjemli <hjemli@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
A lot of shell scripts contained stuff starting with
while case "$#" in 0) break ;; esac
and similar. I consider breaking out of the condition instead of the
body od the loop ugly, and the implied "true" value of the
non-matching case is not really obvious to humans at first glance. It
happens not to be obvious to some BSD shells, either, but that's
because they are not POSIX-compliant. In most cases, this has been
replaced by a straight condition using "test". "case" has the
advantage of being faster than "test" on vintage shells where "test"
is not a builtin. Since none of them is likely to run the git
scripts, anyway, the added readability should be worth the change.
A few loops have had their termination condition expressed
differently.
Signed-off-by: David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The diffstat can be controlled either with command-line options
(--summary|--no-summary) or with merge.diffstat. The default is
left as it was: diffstat is active by default.
Signed-off-by: Alex Riesen <raa.lkml@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Instead, we complain to the user and suggest that they explicitly
specify the remote and branch. We depend on the exit status of
git-symbolic-ref, so let's go ahead and document that.
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
This updates five commands (merge, pull, rebase, revert and cherry-pick)
so that they can be started from a subdirectory.
This may not actually be what we want to do. These commands are
inherently whole-tree operations, and an inexperienced user may
mistakenly expect a "git pull" from a subdirectory would merge
only the subdirectory the command started from.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
If the user tries to run a porcelainish command which requires
a working directory in a bare repository they may get unexpected
results which are difficult to predict and may differ from command
to command.
Instead we should detect that the current repository is a bare
repository and refuse to run the command there, as there is no
working directory associated with it.
[jc: updated Shawn's original somewhat -- bugs are mine.]
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
After a pull that results in a conflicted merge, a new user
often tries another "git pull" in desperation. When the index
is unmerged, merge backends correctly bail out without touching
either index nor the working tree, so this does not make the
wound any worse.
The user will however see several lines of messsages during this
process, such as "filename: needs merge", "you need to resolve
your current index first", "Merging...", and "Entry ... would be
overwritten by merge. Cannot merge.". They are unnecessarily
alarming, and cause useful conflict messages from the first pull
scroll off the top of the terminal.
This changes pull and merge to run "git-ls-files -u" upfront and
stop them much earlier than we currently do. Old timers may
know better and would not to try pulling again before cleaning
things up; this change adds extra overhead that is unnecessary
for them. But this would be worth paying for to save new people
from needless confusion.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Now that git-merge knows how to use the pull.{twohead,octopus}
configuration options to select the default merge strategy there
is no reason for git-pull to do the same immediately prior to
invoking git-merge.
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
If git-merge exits with a non-zero exit status so should git-pull.
This way the caller of git-pull knows the task did not complete
successfully simply by checking the process exit status.
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Junio rightly pointed out that the --reflog-action parameter
was starting to get out of control, as most porcelain code
needed to hand it to other porcelain and plumbing alike to
ensure the reflog contained the top-level user action and
not the lower-level actions it invoked.
At Junio's suggestion we are introducing the new set_reflog_action
function to all shell scripts, allowing them to declare early on
what their default reflog name should be, but this setting only
takes effect if the caller has not already set the GIT_REFLOG_ACTION
environment variable.
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
The warning triggered even when running "git fetch" only
when resulting .git/FETCH_HEAD only contained
branches marked as 'not-for-merge'.
Signed-off-by: Josef Weidendorfer <weidendo@gmx.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
We used to complain that we cannot merge anything we fetched
with a local branch that does not exist yet. Just treat the
case as a natural extension of fast forwarding and make the
local branch'es tip point at the same commit we just fetched.
After all an empty repository without an initial commit is an
ancestor of any commit.
[jc: I added a trivial test. We've become sloppy but we should
stick to the discipline of covering new behaviour with new
tests. ]
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
When git-merge updates HEAD as a result of a merge record what
happened during the merge into the reflog associated with HEAD
(if any). The log reports who caused the update (git-merge or
git-pull, by invoking git-merge), what the remote ref names were
and the type of merge process used.
The merge information can be useful when reviewing a reflog for
a branch such as `master` where fast forward and trivial in index
merges might be common as the user tracks an upstream.
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
When git-fetch updates a reference record in the associated reflog
what type of update took place and who caused it (git-fetch or
git-pull, by invoking git-fetch).
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Some implementations of "expr" (e.g. FreeBSD's) fail, if an
argument starts with a dash.
Signed-off-by: Dennis Stosberg <dennis@stosberg.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
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>
Running 'git pull' while on the tracking branch has a built-in
safety valve to fast-forward the index and working tree to match
the branch head, but it errs on the safe side too cautiously.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
If the user does not set a merge strategy for git-pull,
let git-merge calculate a default strategy.
[jc: with minor stylistic tweaks]
Signed-off-by: Mark Hollomon <markhollomon@comcast.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
This is to be nicer to people with unusable GECOS field.
"git-var -l" is currently broken in that when used by a user who
does not have a usable GECOS field and has not corrected it by
exporting GIT_COMMITTER_NAME environment variable it dies when
it tries to output GIT_COMMITTER_IDENT (same thing for AUTHOR).
"git-pull" used "git-var -l" only because it needed to get a
configuration variable before "git-repo-config --get" was
introduced. Use the latter tool designed exactly for this
purpose.
"git-sh-setup" used "git-var GIT_AUTHOR_IDENT" without actually
wanting to use its value. The only purpose was to cause the
command to check and barf if the repository format version
recorded in the $GIT_DIR/config file is too new for us to deal
with correctly. Instead, use "repo-config --get" on a random
property and see if it die()s, and check if the exit status is
128 (comes from die -- missing variable is reported with exit
status 1, so we can tell that case apart).
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Now all the users of this script detect its exit status and die,
complaining that it is outside git repository. So move the code
that dies from all callers to git-sh-setup script.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
This does two things:
- It changes the hardcoded default merge strategy for two-head
git-pull from resolve to recursive.
- .git/config file acquires two configuration items.
pull.twohead names the strategy for two-head case, and
pull.octopus names the strategy for octopus merge.
IOW you are paranoid, you can have the following lines in your
.git/config file and keep using git-merge-resolve when pulling
one remote:
[pull]
twohead = resolve
OTOH, you can say this:
[pull]
twohead = resolve
twohead = recursive
to try quicker resolve first, and when it fails, fall back to
recursive.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Refactored fetch options into separate fetch-options.txt.
Made git-merge use merge-options.
Made git-fetch use fetch-options.
Made git-pull use merge-options and fetch-options.
Added --help option to git-pull and git-format-patch scripts.
Rewrote Documentation/Makefile to dynamically determine
include dependencies.
Signed-off-by: Jon Loeliger <jdl@freescale.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Pasky and I did overlapping documentation independently; this is to
pick up better wordings from what he sent me.
Signed-off-by: Petr Baudis <pasky@suse.cz>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
With --no-commit flag, git-pull will perform the merge but pretends as
if the merge needed a hand resolve even if automerge cleanly resolves,
to give the user a chance to add further changes and edit the commit
message.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
This again makes git-pull to use git-merge, so that different merge
strategy can be specified from the command line. Without explicit
strategy parameter, it defaults to git-merge-resolve if only one
remote is pulled, and git-merge-octopus otherwise, to keep the
default behaviour of the command the same as the original.
Also this brings another usability measure: -n flag from the command
line, if given, is passed to git-merge to prevent it from running the
diffstat at the end of the merge.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
This uses the git-update-ref command in scripts for safer updates.
Also places where we used to read HEAD ref by using "cat" were fixed
to use git-rev-parse. This will matter when we start using symbolic
references.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
The refspecs specified in the .git/remotes/<remote> on the "Pull: "
lines are for fetching multiple heads in one go, but most of the time
making an Octopus out of them is not what is wanted. Make git-fetch
leave the marker in .git/FETCH_HEAD file so that later stages can
tell which heads are for merging and which are not.
Tom Prince made me realize how stupid the original behaviour was.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Including the current branch in the list of heads being merged
was not a good idea, so drop it. And shorten the message by
grouping branches and tags together to form a single line.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Linus says that 'of .' to mean the commits came from the local repository
was too confusing and ugly -- I tend to agree with him.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
As promised, this is the "big tool rename" patch. The primary differences
since 0.99.6 are:
(1) git-*-script are no more. The commands installed do not
have any such suffix so users do not have to remember if
something is implemented as a shell script or not.
(2) Many command names with 'cache' in them are renamed with
'index' if that is what they mean.
There are backward compatibility symblic links so that you and
Porcelains can keep using the old names, but the backward
compatibility support is expected to be removed in the near
future.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
When the "git pull" command updates the branch head you are
currently on, before doing anything else, first update your
index file and the working tree contents to that of the new
branch head. Otherwise, the later resolving steps would think
your index file is attempting to revert the change between the
original head commit and the updated head commit.
It uses two-tree fast-forward form of "read-tree -m -u" to
prevent losing whatever local changes you may have in the
working tree to do this update. I think this would at least
make things safer (a lot safer), and prevent mistakes.
Also "git fetch" command is forbidden from fetching and fast
forwarding the current branch head unless --update-head-ok flag
is given. "git pull" passes the flag when it internally calls
"git fetch".
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Jay Soffian