This is a mechanical clean-up of the way *.c files include
system header files.
(1) sources under compat/, platform sha-1 implementations, and
xdelta code are exempt from the following rules;
(2) the first #include must be "git-compat-util.h" or one of
our own header file that includes it first (e.g. config.h,
builtin.h, pkt-line.h);
(3) system headers that are included in "git-compat-util.h"
need not be included in individual C source files.
(4) "git-compat-util.h" does not have to include subsystem
specific header files (e.g. expat.h).
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
[jc: I needed to hand merge the changes to the updated codebase,
so the result needs to be checked.]
Signed-off-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Change get_merge_bases() to be able to clean up after itself if
needed by adding a cleanup parameter.
We don't need to save the flags and restore them afterwards anymore;
that was a leftover from before the flags were moved out of the
range used in revision.c. clear_commit_marks() sets them to zero,
which is enough.
Signed-off-by: Rene Scharfe <rene.scharfe@lsrfire.ath.cx>
Acked-by: Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
This makes sure that many commands that take refs on the command
line to honor core.warnambiguousrefs configuration. Earlier,
the commands affected by this patch did not read the
configuration file.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
These commands are converted to run from a subdirectory.
commit-tree convert-objects merge-base merge-index mktag
pack-objects pack-redundant prune-packed read-tree tar-tree
unpack-file unpack-objects update-server-info write-tree
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
When we have only one merge-base candidates in the result list,
there is no point going back to mark the reachable commits
again. And that is the most common case, so try not to waste
time on it. Suggested by Linus.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
The discussion on the list demonstrated a pathological case where
an ancestor of a merge-base can be left interesting. This commit
introduces a postprocessing phase to fix it.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
The merge-base command acquires a new option, '--all', that causes it
to output all the common ancestor candidates. The "git resolve"
command then uses it to pick the optimum merge base by picking the one
that results in the smallest number of nontrivial merges.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
In commit 4f7eb2e5a3 I fixed git-merge-base
getting confused by datestamps that caused it to traverse things in a
non-obvious order.
However, my fix was a very brute-force one, and it had some really
horrible implications for more complex trees with lots of parallell
development. It might end up traversing all the way to the root commit.
Now, normally that isn't that horrible: it's used mainly for merging, and
the bad cases really tend to happen fairly rarely, so if it takes a few
seconds, we're not in too bad shape.
However, gitk will also do the git-merge-base for every merge it shows,
because it basically re-does the trivial merge in order to show the
"interesting" parts. And there we'd really like the result to be
instantaneous.
This patch does that by walking the tree more completely, and using the
same heuristic as git-rev-list to decide "ok, the rest is uninteresting".
In one - hopefully fairly extreme - case, it made a git-merge-base go from
just under five seconds(!) to a tenth of a second on my machine.
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
On Sat, 30 Jul 2005, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> Yup, it's git-merge-base, and it is confused by the same thing that
> confused git-rev-list.
Hmm.. Here's a tentative fix. I'm not really happy with it, and maybe
somebody else can come up with a better one. I think this one ends up
being quite a bit more expensive than the old one (it will look up _all_
common parents that have a child that isn't common, and then select the
newest one of the bunch), but I haven't really thought it through very
much.
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Fix various things that sparse complains about:
- use NULL instead of 0
- make sure we declare everything properly, or mark it static
- use proper function declarations ("fn(void)" instead of "fn()")
Sparse is always right.
Fixes all in-code names that leaved during "big name change".
Signed-off-by: Alexey Nezhdanov <snake@penza-gsm.ru>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
This allows the programs to use various simplified versions of
the SHA1 names, eg just say "HEAD" for the SHA1 pointed to by
the .git/HEAD file etc.
For example, this commit has been done with
git-commit-tree $(git-write-tree) -p HEAD
instead of the traditional "$(cat .git/HEAD)" syntax.
Make pop_most_recent_commit() return the same objects multiple times, but only
if called with different bits to mark.
This is necessary to make merge-base work again.
Signed-Off-By: Daniel Barkalow <barkalow@iabervon.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
The old implementation was a nice algorithm, but, unfortunately, it could
be confused in some cases and would not necessarily do the obvious thing
if one argument was decended from the other. This version fixes that by
changing the criterion to the most recent common ancestor.
Signed-Off-By: Daniel Barkalow <barkalow@iabervon.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
This switches to my implementation of merge-base, but with the new parsing
library.
Signed-Off-By: Daniel Barkalow <barkalow@iabervon.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Also, make it a fatal error to pass in a non-commit object. The callers
never checked, so better check here.
This simplifies merge-base further. It's now so trivial that it's almost
ridiculous.
parent of two commits.
The question of "best" commit can probably be tweaked almost arbitrarily.
In particular, trying to take things like how big the tree differences
are into account migt be a good idea. This one is just very simple.
Junio C Hamano