git-rebase.sh wrote strategy options to .git/rebase/merge/strategy_opts
in the following format:
'--ours' '--renormalize'
Note the double spaces.
git-rebase--interactive uses sequencer.c to parse that file, and
sequencer.c used split_cmdline() to get the individual strategy options.
After splitting, sequencer.c prefixed each "option" with a double dash,
so, concatenating all its options would result in:
-- --ours -- --renormalize
So, when it ended up calling try_merge_strategy(), that in turn would run
git merge-$strategy -- --ours -- --renormalize $merge_base -- $head $remote
instead of the expected/desired
git merge-$strategy --ours --renormalize $merge_base -- $head $remote
Remove the extra spaces so that when it goes through split_cmdline() we end
up with the desired command line.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
rebase backends currently behave differently with empty commit messages,
largely as a side-effect of the different underlying commands on which
they are based. am-based rebases apply commits with an empty commit
message without stopping or requiring the user to specify an extra flag.
(It is interesting to note that am-based rebases are the default rebase
type, and no one has ever requested a --no-allow-empty-message flag to
change this behavior.) merge-based and interactive-based rebases (which
are ultimately based on git-commit), will currently halt on any such
commits and require the user to manually specify what to do with the
commit and continue.
One possible rationale for the difference in behavior is that the purpose
of an "am" based rebase is solely to transplant an existing history, while
an "interactive" rebase is one whose purpose is to polish a series before
making it publishable. Thus, stopping and asking for confirmation for a
possible problem is more appropriate in the latter case. However, there
are two problems with this rationale:
1) merge-based rebases are also non-interactive and there are multiple
types of rebases that use the interactive machinery but are not
explicitly interactive (e.g. when either --rebase-merges or
--keep-empty are specified without --interactive). These rebases are
also used solely to transplant an existing history, and thus also
should default to --allow-empty-message.
2) this rationale only says that the user is more accepting of stopping
in the case of an explicitly interactive rebase, not that stopping
for this particular reason actually makes sense. Exploring whether
it makes sense, requires backing up and analyzing the underlying
commands...
If git-commit did not error out on empty commits by default, accidental
creation of commits with empty messages would be a very common occurrence
(this check has caught me many times). Further, nearly all such empty
commit messages would be considered an accidental error (as evidenced by a
huge amount of documentation across version control systems and in various
blog posts explaining how important commit messages are). A simple check
for what would otherwise be a common error thus made a lot of sense, and
git-commit gained an --allow-empty-message flag for special case
overrides. This has made commits with empty messages very rare.
There are two sources for commits with empty messages for rebase (and
cherry-pick): (a) commits created in git where the user previously
specified --allow-empty-message to git-commit, and (b) commits imported
into git from other version control systems. In case (a), the user has
already explicitly specified that there is something special about this
commit that makes them not want to specify a commit message; forcing them
to re-specify with every cherry-pick or rebase seems more likely to be
infuriating than helpful. In case (b), the commit is highly unlikely to
have been authored by the person who has imported the history and is doing
the rebase or cherry-pick, and thus the user is unlikely to be the
appropriate person to write a commit message for it. Stopping and
expecting the user to modify the commit before proceeding thus seems
counter-productive.
Further, note that while empty commit messages was a common error case for
git-commit to deal with, it is a rare case for rebase (or cherry-pick).
The fact that it is rare raises the question of why it would be worth
checking and stopping on this particular condition and not others. For
example, why doesn't an interactive rebase automatically stop if the
commit message's first line is 2000 columns long, or is missing a blank
line after the first line, or has every line indented with five spaces, or
any number of other myriad problems?
Finally, note that if a user doing an interactive rebase does have the
necessary knowledge to add a message for any such commit and wants to do
so, it is rather simple for them to change the appropriate line from
'pick' to 'reword'. The fact that the subject is empty in the todo list
that the user edits should even serve as a way to notify them.
As far as I can tell, the fact that merge-based and interactive-based
rebases stop on commits with empty commit messages is solely a by-product
of having been based on git-commit. It went without notice for a long
time precisely because such cases are rare. The rareness of this
situation made it difficult to reason about, so when folks did eventually
notice this behavior, they assumed it was there for a good reason and just
added an --allow-empty-message flag. In my opinion, stopping on such
messages not desirable in any of these cases, even the (explicitly)
interactive case.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
git rebase has three different types: am, merge, and interactive, all of
which are implemented in terms of separate scripts. am builds on git-am,
merge builds on git-merge-recursive, and interactive builds on
git-cherry-pick. We make use of features in those lower-level commands in
the different rebase types, but those features don't exist in all of the
lower level commands so we have a range of incompatibilities. Previously,
we just accepted nearly any argument and silently ignored whichever ones
weren't implemented for the type of rebase specified. Change this so the
incompatibilities are documented, included in the testsuite, and tested
for at runtime with an appropriate error message shown.
Some exceptions I left out:
* --merge and --interactive are technically incompatible since they are
supposed to run different underlying scripts, but with a few small
changes, --interactive can do everything that --merge can. In fact,
I'll shortly be sending another patch to remove git-rebase--merge and
reimplement it on top of git-rebase--interactive.
* One could argue that --interactive and --quiet are incompatible since
--interactive doesn't implement a --quiet mode (perhaps since
cherry-pick itself does not implement one). However, the interactive
mode is more quiet than the other modes in general with progress
messages, so one could argue that it's already quiet.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
signoff is not specific to the am-backend. Also, re-order a few options
to make like things (e.g. strategy and strategy-option) be near each
other.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Create a new type of rebase, "preserve-merges", used when rebase is
called with -p.
Before that, the type for preserve-merges was "interactive", and some
places of this script compared $type to "interactive". Instead, the code
now checks if $interactive_rebase is empty or not, as it is set to
"explicit" when calling an interactive rebase (and, possibly, one of its
submodes), and "implied" when calling one of its
submodes (eg. preserve-merges) *without* interactive rebase.
It also detects the presence of the directory "$merge_dir"/rewritten
left by the preserve-merges script when calling rebase --continue,
--skip, etc., and, if it exists, sets the rebase mode to
preserve-merges. In this case, interactive_rebase is set to "explicit",
as "implied" would break some tests.
Signed-off-by: Alban Gruin <alban.gruin@gmail.com>
When running `git rebase --rebase-merges` non-interactively with an
ancestor of HEAD as <upstream> (or leaving the todo list unmodified),
we would ideally recreate the exact same commits as before the rebase.
However, if there are commits in the commit range <upstream>.. that do not
have <upstream> as direct ancestor (i.e. if `git log <upstream>..` would
show commits that are omitted by `git log --ancestry-path <upstream>..`),
this is currently not the case: we would turn them into commits that have
<upstream> as direct ancestor.
Let's illustrate that with a diagram:
C
/ \
A - B - E - F
\ /
D
Currently, after running `git rebase -i --rebase-merges B`, the new branch
structure would be (pay particular attention to the commit `D`):
--- C' --
/ \
A - B ------ E' - F'
\ /
D'
This is not really preserving the branch topology from before! The
reason is that the commit `D` does not have `B` as ancestor, and
therefore it gets rebased onto `B`.
This is unintuitive behavior. Even worse, when recreating branch
structure, most use cases would appear to want cousins *not* to be
rebased onto the new base commit. For example, Git for Windows (the
heaviest user of the Git garden shears, which served as the blueprint
for --rebase-merges) frequently merges branches from `next` early, and
these branches certainly do *not* want to be rebased. In the example
above, the desired outcome would look like this:
--- C' --
/ \
A - B ------ E' - F'
\ /
-- D' --
Let's introduce the term "cousins" for such commits ("D" in the
example), and let's not rebase them by default. For hypothetical
use cases where cousins *do* need to be rebased, `git rebase
--rebase=merges=rebase-cousins` needs to be used.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Once upon a time, this here developer thought: wouldn't it be nice if,
say, Git for Windows' patches on top of core Git could be represented as
a thicket of branches, and be rebased on top of core Git in order to
maintain a cherry-pick'able set of patch series?
The original attempt to answer this was: git rebase --preserve-merges.
However, that experiment was never intended as an interactive option,
and it only piggy-backed on git rebase --interactive because that
command's implementation looked already very, very familiar: it was
designed by the same person who designed --preserve-merges: yours truly.
Some time later, some other developer (I am looking at you, Andreas!
;-)) decided that it would be a good idea to allow --preserve-merges to
be combined with --interactive (with caveats!) and the Git maintainer
(well, the interim Git maintainer during Junio's absence, that is)
agreed, and that is when the glamor of the --preserve-merges design
started to fall apart rather quickly and unglamorously.
The reason? In --preserve-merges mode, the parents of a merge commit (or
for that matter, of *any* commit) were not stated explicitly, but were
*implied* by the commit name passed to the `pick` command.
This made it impossible, for example, to reorder commits. Not to mention
to move commits between branches or, deity forbid, to split topic branches
into two.
Alas, these shortcomings also prevented that mode (whose original
purpose was to serve Git for Windows' needs, with the additional hope
that it may be useful to others, too) from serving Git for Windows'
needs.
Five years later, when it became really untenable to have one unwieldy,
big hodge-podge patch series of partly related, partly unrelated patches
in Git for Windows that was rebased onto core Git's tags from time to
time (earning the undeserved wrath of the developer of the ill-fated
git-remote-hg series that first obsoleted Git for Windows' competing
approach, only to be abandoned without maintainer later) was really
untenable, the "Git garden shears" were born [*1*/*2*]: a script,
piggy-backing on top of the interactive rebase, that would first
determine the branch topology of the patches to be rebased, create a
pseudo todo list for further editing, transform the result into a real
todo list (making heavy use of the `exec` command to "implement" the
missing todo list commands) and finally recreate the patch series on
top of the new base commit.
That was in 2013. And it took about three weeks to come up with the
design and implement it as an out-of-tree script. Needless to say, the
implementation needed quite a few years to stabilize, all the while the
design itself proved itself sound.
With this patch, the goodness of the Git garden shears comes to `git
rebase -i` itself. Passing the `--rebase-merges` option will generate
a todo list that can be understood readily, and where it is obvious
how to reorder commits. New branches can be introduced by inserting
`label` commands and calling `merge <label>`. And once this mode will
have become stable and universally accepted, we can deprecate the design
mistake that was `--preserve-merges`.
Link *1*:
https://github.com/msysgit/msysgit/blob/master/share/msysGit/shears.sh
Link *2*:
https://github.com/git-for-windows/build-extra/blob/master/shears.sh
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
rebase --merge accepts --keep-empty but just ignores it, by using an
implicit interactive rebase the user still gets the rename detection
of a merge based rebase but with with --keep-empty support.
If rebase --keep-empty without --interactive or --merge stops for the
user to resolve merge conflicts then 'git rebase --continue' will
fail. This is because it uses a different code path that does not
create $git_dir/rebase-apply. As rebase --keep-empty was implemented
using cherry-pick it has never supported the am options and now that
interactive rebases support --signoff there is no loss of
functionality by using an implicit interactive rebase.
Signed-off-by: Phillip Wood <phillip.wood@dunelm.org.uk>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
rebase --preserve-merges does not support --signoff so error out
rather than just silently ignoring it so that the user knows the
commits will not be signed off.
Signed-off-by: Phillip Wood <phillip.wood@dunelm.org.uk>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Allow --signoff to be used with --interactive and --merge. In
interactive mode only commits marked to be picked, edited or reworded
will be signed off.
The main motivation for this patch was to allow one to run 'git rebase
--exec "make check" --signoff' which is useful when preparing a patch
series for publication and is more convenient than doing the signoff
with another --exec command.
This change also allows --root without --onto to work with --signoff
as well (--root with --onto was already supported).
Signed-off-by: Phillip Wood <phillip.wood@dunelm.org.uk>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
$OPT_SPEC has always allowed --no-keep-empty so lets start handling
it.
Signed-off-by: Phillip Wood <phillip.wood@dunelm.org.uk>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
At the moment it's an exact copy of git_rebase__interactive except
the name has changed.
Signed-off-by: Wink Saville <wink@saville.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Due to historical reasons, the backend scriptlets for "git rebase"
are structured a bit unusually. As originally designed,
dot-sourcing them from "git rebase" was sufficient to invoke the
specific backend.
However, it was later discovered that some shell implementations
(e.g. FreeBSD 9.x) misbehaved by continuing to execute statements
following a top-level "return" rather than returning control to
the next statement in "git rebase" after dot-sourcing the
scriptlet. To work around this shortcoming, the whole body of
git-rebase--$backend.sh was made into a shell function
git_rebase__$backend, and then the very last line of the scriptlet
called that function.
A more normal architecture is for a dot-sourced scriptlet merely
to define functions (thus acting as a function library), and for
those functions to be called by the script doing the dot-sourcing.
Migrate to this arrangement by moving the git_rebase__$backend
call from the end of a scriptlet into "git rebase" itself.
While at it, remove the large comment block from each scriptlet
explaining this historic anomaly since it serves no purpose under
the new normalized architecture in which a scriptlet is merely a
function library.
Signed-off-by: Wink Saville <wink@saville.com>
Helped-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Helped-by: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
If the user set the environment variable 'squash_onto', the 'rebase'
command would erroneously assume that the user passed the option
'--root'.
Signed-off-by: Phillip Wood <phillip.wood@dunelm.org.uk>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The new command `git rebase --show-current-patch` is useful for seeing
the commit related to the current rebase state. Some however may find
the "git show" command behind it too limiting. You may want to
increase context lines, do a diff that ignores whitespaces...
For these advanced use cases, the user can execute any command they
want with the new pseudo ref REBASE_HEAD.
This also helps show where the stopped commit is from, which is hard
to see from the previous patch which implements --show-current-patch.
Helped-by: Tim Landscheidt <tim@tim-landscheidt.de>
Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
It is useful to see the full patch while resolving conflicts in a
rebase. The only way to do it now is
less .git/rebase-*/patch
which could turn out to be a lot longer to type if you are in a
linked worktree, or not at top-dir. On top of that, an ordinary user
should not need to peek into .git directory. The new option is
provided to examine the patch.
Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
This option allows commits with empty commit messages to be rebased,
matching the same option in git-commit and git-cherry-pick. While empty
log messages are frowned upon, sometimes one finds them in older
repositories (e.g. translated from another VCS [0]), or have other
reasons for desiring them. The option is available in git-commit and
git-cherry-pick, so it is natural to make other git tools play nicely
with them. Adding this as an option allows the default to be "give the
user a chance to fix", while not interrupting the user's workflow
otherwise [1].
[0]: https://stackoverflow.com/q/8542304
[1]: https://public-inbox.org/git/7vd33afqjh.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org/
To implement this, add a new --allow-empty-message flag. Then propagate
it to all calls of 'git commit', 'git cherry-pick', and 'git rebase--helper'
within the rebase scripts.
Signed-off-by: Genki Sky <sky@genki.is>
Reviewed-by: Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Attempting to rebase when the HEAD is detached and is already
up to date with upstream (so there's nothing to do), the
following message is shown
Current branch HEAD is up to date.
which is clearly wrong as HEAD is not a branch.
Handle the special case of HEAD correctly to give a more precise
error message.
Signed-off-by: Kaartic Sivaraam <kaartic.sivaraam@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Signed-off-by: Kaartic Sivaraam <kaartic.sivaraam@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Signed-off-by: Kaartic Sivaraam <kaartic.sivaraam@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Signed-off-by: Kaartic Sivaraam <kaartic.sivaraam@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The variable "branch_name" holds the <branch> parameter in "git
rebase <upstream> <branch>", but one codepath did not use it after
assigning $1 to it (instead it kept using $1). Make it use the
variable consistently.
Also, update an error message to say there is no such branch or
commit, as we are expecting either of them, and not limiting
ourselves to a branch name.
Signed-off-by: Kaartic Sivaraam <kaartic.sivaraam@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Signed-off-by: Kaartic Sivaraam <kaartic.sivaraam@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The intention is to ignore all output from the 'git stash apply' call.
Adjust the order of the redirection to ensure that both stdout and
stderr are redirected to /dev/null.
Signed-off-by: Todd Zullinger <tmz@pobox.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Currently, git-rebase will silently ignore any unexpected command-line
switches and arguments (the command-line produced by git rev-parse).
This allowed the rev-parse bug, fixed in the preceding commits, to go
unnoticed. Let's make sure that doesn't happen again. We shouldn't be
ignoring unexpected arguments. Let's not.
Signed-off-by: Brandon Casey <drafnel@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Pass the "--progress" option to format-patch when the standard error
stream is connected to the terminal and "--quiet" is not given.
Signed-off-by: Kevin Willford <kewillf@microsoft.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The git UI can be improved by addressing the error messages to those
they help: inexperienced and casual git users. To this intent, it is
helpful to make sure the terms used in those messages can be understood
by this segment of users, and that they guide them to resolve the
problem.
In particular, failure to apply a patch during a git rebase is a common
problem that can be very destabilizing for the inexperienced user. It is
important to lead them toward the resolution of the conflict (which is a
3-steps process, thus complex) and reassure them that they can escape a
situation they can't handle with "--abort". This commit answer those two
points by detailling the resolution process and by avoiding cryptic git
linguo.
Signed-off-by: William Duclot <william.duclot@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The rebase messages are printed to stderr traditionally. However due
to a bug introduced in 587947750b (rebase: implement --[no-]autostash
and rebase.autostash, 2013-05-12) which was faithfully copied when
reimplementing parts of the interactive rebase in the sequencer the
autostash messages are printed to stdout instead.
It is time to fix that: let's print the autostash messages to stderr
instead of stdout.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Signed-off-by: Phillip Wood <phillip.wood@dunelm.org.uk>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
This makes it easy to sign off a whole patchset before submission.
Signed-off-by: Giuseppe Bilotta <giuseppe.bilotta@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
There are occasions when you decide to abort an in-progress rebase and
move on to do something else but you forget to do "git rebase --abort"
first. Or the rebase has been in progress for so long you forgot about
it. By the time you realize that (e.g. by starting another rebase)
it's already too late to retrace your steps. The solution is normally
rm -r .git/<some rebase dir>
and continue with your life. But there could be two different
directories for <some rebase dir> (and it obviously requires some
knowledge of how rebase works), and the ".git" part could be much
longer if you are not at top-dir, or in a linked worktree. And
"rm -r" is very dangerous to do in .git, a mistake in there could
destroy object database or other important data.
Provide "git rebase --quit" for this use case, mimicking a precedent
that is "git cherry-pick --quit".
Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Positional arguments, such as $0, $1, etc, need to be stored on shell
variables for use in translatable strings, according to gettext manual
[1].
Add git-sh-setup.sh to LOCALIZED_SH variable in Makefile to enable
extraction of string marked for translation by xgettext.
Source git-sh-i18n in git-sh-setup.sh for gettext support.
git-sh-setup.sh is a shell library to be sourced by other shell scripts.
In order to avoid other scripts from sourcing git-sh-i18n twice, remove
line that sources it from them. Not sourcing git-sh-i18n in any script
that uses gettext would lead to failure due to, for instance, gettextln
not being found.
[1] http://www.gnu.org/software/gettext/manual/html_node/Preparing-Shell-Scripts.html
Signed-off-by: Vasco Almeida <vascomalmeida@sapo.pt>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Mark placeholder "<branch>" in git-rebase.sh for translation. The string
containing the named placeholder is passed to shell function
error_on_missing_default_upstream in git-parse-remote.sh which uses it
to display a command hint for the user.
Signed-off-by: Vasco Almeida <vascomalmeida@sapo.pt>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The string message marked for translation should use eval_gettext
variant instead of the gettext one, since we want to dollar-substitute
$head_name in the result.
Signed-off-by: Vasco Almeida <vascomalmeida@sapo.pt>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
ba3c69a9 (commit: teach --gpg-sign option, 2011-10-05) introduced a
"signed commit" by teaching the --[no]-gpg-sign option and the
commit.gpgsign configuration variable to various commands that
create commits.
Teaching these to "git commit" and "git merge", both of which are
end-user facing Porcelain commands, was perfectly fine. Allowing
the plumbing "git commit-tree" to suddenly change the behaviour to
surprise the scripts by paying attention to commit.gpgsign was not.
Among the in-tree scripts, filter-branch, quiltimport, rebase and
stash are the commands that run "commit-tree". If any of these
wants to allow users to always sign every single commit, they should
offer their own configuration (e.g. "filterBranch.gpgsign") with an
option to disable signing (e.g. "git filter-branch --no-gpgsign").
Ignoring commit.gpgsign option _obviously_ breaks the backward
compatibility, but it is easy to follow the standard pattern in
scripts to honor whatever configuration variable they choose to
follow. E.g.
case $(git config --bool commit.gpgsign) in
true) sign=-S ;;
*) sign= ;;
esac &&
git commit-tree $sign ...whatever other args...
Do so to make sure that "git rebase" keeps paying attention to the
configuration variable, which unfortunately is a documented mistake.
Helped-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
In the later steps of preparing a patch series I do not want to
edit or reorder the patches any more, but just make sure the
test suite passes after each patch and also to fix breakage
right there if some of the steps fail. I could run
EDITOR=true git rebase -i <anchor> -x "make test"
but it would be simpler if it can be spelled like so:
git rebase <anchor> -x "make test"
Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
After rebasing, we call "gc --auto" to clean up if we
created a lot of loose objects. However, we do so inside an
&&-chain. If "gc --auto" fails (e.g., because a previous
background gc blocked us by leaving "gc.log" in place),
then:
1. We will fail to clean up the state directory, leaving
the user stuck in the rebase forever (even "git am
--abort" doesn't work, because it calls "gc --auto"!).
2. In some cases, we may return a bogus exit code from
rebase, indicating failure when everything except the
auto-gc succeeded.
We can fix this by ignoring the exit code of "gc --auto".
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
This is documented as an option but we don't actually accept it.
Support it so that it is possible to override the "rebase.autostash"
config variable.
Reported-by: Daniel Hahler <genml+git-2014@thequod.de>
Signed-off-by: John Keeping <john@keeping.me.uk>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
When the branch to be rebased is already up to date, we
"git checkout" the branch, print an "up to date" message,
and end the rebase early. However, our checkout may print
"Switched to branch 'foo'" or "Already on 'foo'", even if
the user has asked for "--quiet".
We should avoid printing these messages at all, "--quiet" or
no. Since the rebase is a noop, this checkout can be seen as
optimizing out these other two checkout operations (that
happen in a real rebase):
1. Moving to the detached HEAD to start the rebase; we
always feed "-q" to checkout there, and instead rely on
our own custom message (which respects --quiet).
2. Finishing a rebase, where we move to the final branch.
Here we actually use update-ref rather than
git-checkout, and produce no messages.
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
If $GIT_COMMON_DIR is set, it should be $GIT_COMMON_DIR/hooks/, not
$GIT_DIR/hooks/. Just let rev-parse --git-path handle it.
Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
When the `--fork-point` argument was added to `git rebase`, we changed
the value of $upstream to be the fork point instead of the point from
which we want to rebase. When $orig_head..$upstream is empty this does
not change the behaviour, but when there are new changes in the upstream
we are no longer checking if any of them are patch-identical with
changes in $upstream..$orig_head.
Fix this by introducing a new variable to hold the fork point and using
this to restrict the range as an extra (negative) revision argument so
that the set of desired revisions becomes (in fork-point mode):
git rev-list --cherry-pick --right-only \
$upstream...$orig_head ^$fork_point
This allows us to correctly handle the scenario where we have the
following topology:
C --- D --- E <- dev
/
B <- master@{1}
/
o --- B' --- C* --- D* <- master
where:
- B' is a fixed-up version of B that is not patch-identical with B;
- C* and D* are patch-identical to C and D respectively and conflict
textually if applied in the wrong order;
- E depends textually on D.
The correct result of `git rebase master dev` is that B is identified as
the fork-point of dev and master, so that C, D, E are the commits that
need to be replayed onto master; but C and D are patch-identical with C*
and D* and so can be dropped, so that the end result is:
o --- B' --- C* --- D* --- E <- dev
If the fork-point is not identified, then picking B onto a branch
containing B' results in a conflict and if the patch-identical commits
are not correctly identified then picking C onto a branch containing D
(or equivalently D*) results in a conflict.
This change allows us to handle both of these cases, where previously we
either identified the fork-point (with `--fork-point`) but not the
patch-identical commits *or* (with `--no-fork-point`) identified the
patch-identical commits but not the fact that master had been rewritten.
Reported-by: Ted Felix <ted@tedfelix.com>
Signed-off-by: John Keeping <john@keeping.me.uk>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
When a user invokes
$ git rebase -i @~3
with dirty files and rebase.autostash turned on, and exits the $EDITOR
with an empty buffer, the autostash fails to apply. Although the primary
focus of rr/rebase-autostash was to get the git-rebase--backend.sh
scripts to return control to git-rebase.sh, it missed this case in
git-rebase--interactive.sh. Since this case is unlike the other cases
which return control for housekeeping, assign it a special return status
and handle that return value explicitly in git-rebase.sh.
Reported-by: Karen Etheridge <ether@cpan.org>
Signed-off-by: Ramkumar Ramachandra <artagnon@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The Git CodingGuidelines prefer the $(...) construct for command
substitution instead of using the backquotes `...`.
The backquoted form is the traditional method for command
substitution, and is supported by POSIX. However, all but the
simplest uses become complicated quickly. In particular, embedded
command substitutions and/or the use of double quotes require
careful escaping with the backslash character.
The patch was generated by:
for _f in $(find . -name "*.sh")
do
sed -i 's@`\(.*\)`@$(\1)@g' ${_f}
done
and then carefully proof-read.
Signed-off-by: Elia Pinto <gitter.spiros@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Matthieu Moy <Matthieu.Moy@imag.fr>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
This reverts commit 99855ddf4b.
The workaround 99855ddf introduced to deal with problematic
"return" statements in scripts run by "dot" commands located
inside functions only handles one part of the problem. The
issue has now been addressed by not using "return" statements
in this way in the git-rebase--*.sh scripts.
This workaround is therefore no longer necessary, so clean
up the code by reverting it.
Signed-off-by: Kyle J. McKay <mackyle@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Matthieu Moy <Matthieu.Moy@imag.fr>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Teach rebase the same shorthand as checkout and merge to name the
branch to rebase the current branch on; that is, that "-" means "the
branch we were previously on".
Requested-by: Tim Chase <git@tim.thechases.com>
Signed-off-by: Brian Gesiak <modocache@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Signed-off-by: Nicolas Vigier <boklm@mars-attacks.org>
Signed-off-by: brian m. carlson <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
There is no functional change. The reason for this change is to be able
to add a new option taking an optional argument.
Signed-off-by: Nicolas Vigier <boklm@mars-attacks.org>
Signed-off-by: brian m. carlson <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The -M option does not exist in OPTIONS_SPEC, so there is no use to try
to find it.
Signed-off-by: Nicolas Vigier <boklm@mars-attacks.org>
Signed-off-by: brian m. carlson <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Remove a check on the number of arguments for --onto and -x options.
It is not possible for $# to be <= 2 at this point :
- if --onto or -x has an argument, git rev-parse --parseopt will
provide something like this :
set -- --onto 'x' --
when parsing the "--onto" option, $# will be 3 or more if there are
other options.
- if --onto or -x doesn't have an argument, git rev-parse --parseopt
will exit with an error and display usage information.
Signed-off-by: Nicolas Vigier <boklm@mars-attacks.org>
Signed-off-by: brian m. carlson <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
If the variable $OPTIONS_STUCKLONG is not empty, then rev-parse
option parsing is done in --stuck-long mode.
Signed-off-by: Nicolas Vigier <boklm@mars-attacks.org>
Signed-off-by: brian m. carlson <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
When no arguments are specified, $switch_to is empty so we end up
passing the empty string to "git merge-base --fork-point", which causes
an error. git-rebase carries on at this point, but in fact we have
failed to apply the fork-point operation.
It turns out that the test in t3400 that was meant to test this didn't
actually need the fork-point behaviour, so enhance it to make sure that
the fork-point is applied correctly. The modified test fails without
the change to git-rebase.sh in this patch.
Reported-by: Andreas Krey <a.krey@gmx.de>
Signed-off-by: John Keeping <john@keeping.me.uk>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Commit 15a147e (rebase: use @{upstream} if no upstream specified,
2011-02-09) says:
Make it default to 'git rebase @{upstream}'. That is also what
'git pull [--rebase]' defaults to, so it only makes sense that
'git rebase' defaults to the same thing.
but that isn't actually the case. Since commit d44e712 (pull: support
rebased upstream + fetch + pull --rebase, 2009-07-19), pull has actually
chosen the most recent reflog entry which is an ancestor of the current
branch if it can find one.
Add a '--fork-point' argument to git-rebase that can be used to trigger
this behaviour. This option is turned on by default if no non-option
arguments are specified on the command line, otherwise we treat an
upstream specified on the command-line literally.
Signed-off-by: John Keeping <john@keeping.me.uk>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Since a1549e10, git-rebase--am.sh uses the shell's "return" statement, to
mean "return from the current file inclusion", which is POSIXly correct,
but badly interpreted on FreeBSD, which returns from the current
function, hence skips the finish_rebase statement that follows the file
inclusion.
Make the use of "return" portable by using the file inclusion as the last
statement of a function.
Reported-by: Christoph Mallon <christoph.mallon@gmx.de>
Signed-off-by: Matthieu Moy <Matthieu.Moy@imag.fr>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Elijah Newren