This adds a "int *flag" parameter to resolve_ref() and makes
for_each_ref() family to call callback function with an extra
"int flag" parameter. They are used to give two bits of
information (REF_ISSYMREF and REF_ISPACKED) about the ref.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
This is a long overdue fix to the API for for_each_ref() family
of functions. It allows the callers to specify a callback data
pointer, so that the caller does not have to use static
variables to communicate with the callback funciton.
The updated for_each_ref() family takes a function of type
int (*fn)(const char *, const unsigned char *, void *)
and a void pointer as parameters, and calls the function with
the name of the ref and its SHA-1 with the caller-supplied void
pointer as parameters.
The commit updates two callers, builtin-name-rev.c and
builtin-pack-refs.c as an example.
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>
This changes the calling convention of built-in commands and
passes the "prefix" (i.e. pathname of $PWD relative to the
project root level) down to them.
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
[jc: moved the difference code around into its own function.]
Signed-off-by: Santi Béjar <sbejar@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
"git branch" uses "rev-parse --all" and becomes much too slow when
there are many tags (it scans all refs). Use the new "--branches"
option of rev-parse to speed things up.
Signed-off-by: Sean Estabrooks <seanlkml@sympatico.ca>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
When we are in a subdirectory of a git archive, we need to take the prefix
of that subdirectory into accoung when we verify filename arguments.
Noted by Matthias Lederhofer
This also uses the improved error reporting for all the other git commands
that use the revision parsing interfaces, not just git-rev-parse. Also, it
makes the error reporting for mixed filenames and argument flags clearer
(you cannot put flags after the start of the pathname list).
[jc: with fix to a trivial typo noticed by Timo Hirvonen]
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Currently, if git-rev-parse encounters an argument that is neither a
recognizable revision name nor the name of an existing file or
directory, and it hasn't encountered a "--" argument, it prints an
error message saying "No such file or directory". This can be
confusing for users, including users of programs such as gitk that
use git-rev-parse, who may then think that they can't ask about the
history of files that no longer exist.
This makes it print a better error message, one that points out the
ambiguity and tells the user what to do to fix it.
Signed-off-by: Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>
For consistency reasons, we should probably allow that to be written as
just "..branch", the same way we can write "branch.." to mean "everything
in HEAD but not in "branch".
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
When passing in a pathname pattern without the "--" separator on the
command line, we verify that the pathnames in question exist. However,
there were two bugs in that verification:
- git-rev-parse would only check the first pathname, and silently allow
any invalid subsequent pathname, whether it existed or not (which
defeats the purpose of the check, and is also inconsistent with what
git-rev-list actually does)
- git-rev-list (and "git log" etc) would check each filename, but if the
check failed, it would print the error using the first one, i.e.:
[torvalds@g5 git]$ git log Makefile bad-file
fatal: 'Makefile': No such file or directory
instead of saying that it's 'bad-file' that doesn't exist.
This fixes both bugs.
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
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>
Well, assuming breaking --merge-order is fine, here's a patch (on top of
the other ones) that makes
git log <filename>
actually work, as far as I can tell.
I didn't add the logic for --before/--after flags, but that should be
pretty trivial, and is independent of this anyway.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
This new flag is similar to --objects, but causes rev-list to
show list of "uninteresting" commits that appear on the edge
commit prefixed with '-'.
Downstream pack-objects will be changed to take these as hints
to use the trees and blobs contained with them as base objects
of resulting pack, producing an incomplete (not self-contained)
pack.
Such a pack cannot be used in .git/objects/pack (it is prevented
by git-index-pack erroring out if it is fed to git-fetch-pack -k
or git-clone-pack), but would be useful when transferring only
small changes to huge blobs.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
This adds --date-order to rev-list; it is similar to topo order
in the sense that no parent comes before all of its children,
but otherwise things are still ordered in the commit timestamp
order.
The same flag is also added to show-branch.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Earlier we had a workaround to avoid misspelled revision name to
be taken as a filename when "--no-revs --no-flags" are in
effect. This cleans up the logic.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Using "--verify" together with "--no-flags" makes perfect sense, but
git-rev-parse would complain about it when it saw a flag, even though it
would never actually use/output that flag.
This fixes it.
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
This builds on top of the previous one.
Traditionally, head(1) and tail(1) allow their line limits to be
parsed this way.
Signed-off-by: Eric Wong <normalperson@yhbt.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Both -n<n> and -n <n> are supported. POSIX versions of head(1) and
tail(1) allow their line limits to be parsed this way. I find
--max-count to be a commonly used option, and also similar in spirit to
head/tail, so I decided to make life easier on my worn out (and lazy :)
fingers with this patch.
Signed-off-by: Eric Wong <normalperson@yhbt.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
The latest update to avoid misspelled revs interfered when we
were not interested in parsing non flags or arguments not meant
for rev-list. This makes these two forms work again:
git whatchanged -- git-fetch-script
We could enable "!def" in the part this change touches to make
the above work without '--', but then it would cause misspelled
v2.6.14..v2.6.16 to be given to diff-tree and defeats the whole
point of the previous fix.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
The usage of rev-parse to serve as a flag/option parser
for git-whatchanged and other commands have serious limitation
that the flags cannot be something that is supported by
rev-parse itself, and it cannot worked around easily. Since
this is rarely used "poor-man's describe", rename the option for
now as an easier workaround.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
We do not allow abbreviation shorter than 4 letters in other
parts of the system so do not attempt to generate such.
Noticed by Uwe Zeisberger.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
The new option behaves just like --verify, but outputs an
abbreviated object name that is unique within the repository.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
If you pass it a filename without the "--" marker to separate it from
revision information and flags, we now require that the file in question
actually exists. This makes mis-typed revision information not be silently
just considered a strange filename.
With the "--" marker, you can continue to pass in filenames that do not
actually exists - useful for querying what happened to a file that you
no longer have in the repository.
[ All scripts should use the "--" format regardless, to make things
unambiguous. So this change should not affect any existing tools ]
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
When --show-prefix is useful, sometimes it is easier to cd up to
the toplevel of the tree. This is equivalent to:
git rev-parse --show-prefix | sed -e 's|[^/][^/]*|..|g'
but we do not have to invoke sed for that.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Ok. This is the insane patch to do this.
It really isn't very careful, and the reason I call it "approxidate()"
will become obvious when you look at the code. It is very liberal in what
it accepts, to the point where sometimes the results may not make a whole
lot of sense.
It accepts "last week" as a date string, by virtue of "last" parsing as
the number 1, and it totally ignoring superfluous fluff like "ago", so
"last week" ends up being exactly the same thing as "1 week ago". Fine so
far.
It has strange side effects: "last december" will actually parse as "Dec
1", which actually _does_ turn out right, because it will then notice that
it's not December yet, so it will decide that you must be talking about a
date last year. So it actually gets it right, but it's kind of for the
"wrong" reasons.
It also accepts the numbers 1..10 in string format ("one" .. "ten"), so
you can do "ten weeks ago" or "ten hours ago" and it will do the right
thing.
But it will do some really strange thigns too: the string "this will last
forever", will not recognize anyting but "last", which is recognized as
"1", which since it doesn't understand anything else it will think is the
day of the month. So if you do
gitk --since="this will last forever"
the date will actually parse as the first day of the current month.
And it will parse the string "now" as "now", but only because it doesn't
understand it at all, and it makes everything relative to "now".
Similarly, it doesn't actually parse the "ago" or "from now", so "2 weeks
ago" is exactly the same as "2 weeks from now". It's the current date
minus 14 days.
But hey, it's probably better (and certainly faster) than depending on GNU
date. So now you can portably do things like
gitk --since="two weeks and three days ago"
git log --since="July 5"
git-whatchanged --since="10 hours ago"
git log --since="last october"
and it will actually do exactly what you thought it would do (I think). It
will count 17 days backwards, and it will do so even if you don't have GNU
date installed.
(I don't do "last monday" or similar yet, but I can extend it to that too
if people want).
It was kind of fun trying to write code that uses such totally relaxed
"understanding" of dates yet tries to get it right for the trivial cases.
The result should be mixed with a few strange preprocessor tricks, and be
submitted for the IOCCC ;)
Feel free to try it out, and see how many strange dates it gets right. Or
wrong.
And if you find some interesting (and valid - not "interesting" as in
"strange", but "interesting" as in "I'd be interested in actually doing
this) thing it gets wrong - usually by not understanding it and silently
just doing some strange things - please holler.
Now, as usual this certainly hasn't been getting a lot of testing. But my
code always works, no?
Linus
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
This does two things:
- we don't allow "." and ".." as components of a refname. Thus get_sha1()
will not accept "./refname" as being the same as "refname" any more.
- git-rev-parse stops doing revision translation after seeing a pathname,
to match the brhaviour of all the tools (once we see a pathname,
everything else will also be parsed as a pathname).
Basically, if you did
git log *
and "gitk" was somewhere in the "*", we don't want to replace the filename
"gitk" with the SHA1 of the branch with the same name.
Of course, if there is any change of ambiguity, you should always use "--"
to make it explicit what are filenames and what are revisions, but this
makes the normal cases sane. The refname rule also means that instead of
the "--", you can do the same thing we're used to doing with filenames
that start with a slash: use "./filename" instead, and now it's a
filename, not an option (and not a revision).
So "git log ./*.c" is now actually a perfectly valid thing to do, even if
the first C-file might have the same name as a branch.
Trivial test:
git-rev-parse gitk ./gitk gitk
should output something like
9843c3074d
./gitk
gitk
where the "./gitk" isn't seen as a revision, and the second "gitk" is a
filename simply because we've seen filenames already, and thus stopped
doing revision parsing.
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
This actually does three things:
- make "--dense" the default for git-rev-list. Since dense is a no-op if
no filenames are given, this doesn't actually change any historical
behaviour, but it's logically the right default (if we want to prune on
filenames, do it fully. The sparse "merge-only" thing may be useful,
but it's not what you'd normally expect)
- make "git-rev-parse" show the default revision control before it shows
any pathnames.
This was a real bug, but nobody would ever have noticed, because
the default thing tends to only make sense for git-rev-list, and
git-rev-list didn't use to take pathnames.
- it changes "git-rev-list" to match the other commands that take a mix
of revisions and filenames - it no longer requires the "--" before
filenames (although you still need to do it if a filename could be
confused with a revision name, eg "gitk" in the git archive)
This all just makes for much more pleasant and obvous usage. Just doing a
gitk t/
does the obvious thing: it will show the history as it concerns the "t/"
subdirectory.
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
If rev-parse output includes both flags and files, we should pass on any
"--" marker we see, so that the end result can also tell the difference
between a flag and a filename that begins with '-'.
[jc: merged a later one liner updates from Linus]
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Although it really is very convenient, not requiring explicit
'-r' option to name revs is sometimes ambiguous.
Usually we allow a "--" to say where a filename starts when it
_is_ ambiguous. However, we fail that at times. In particular,
git-rev-parse fails it.
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Cloning from a repository with more than 256 refs (heads and tags
included) will choke, because upload-pack has a built-in limit of
feeding not more than MAX_NEEDS (currently 256) heads to underlying
git-rev-list. This is a problem when cloning a repository with many
tags, like http://www.linux-mips.org/pub/scm/linux.git, which has 290+
tags.
This commit introduces a new flag, --all, to git-rev-list, to include
all refs in the repository. Updated upload-pack detects requests that
ask more than MAX_NEEDS refs, and sends everything back instead.
We may probably want to tweak the definitions of MAX_NEEDS and
MAX_HAS, but that is a separate topic.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
This adds the options "--since=date" and "--before=date" to git-rev-parse,
which knows how to translate them into seconds since the epoch for
git-rev-list.
With this, you can do
git log --since="2 weeks ago"
or
git log --until=yesterday
to show the commits that have happened in the last two weeks or are
older than 24 hours, respectively.
The flags "--after=" and "--before" are synonyms for --since and --until,
and you can combine them, so
git log --after="Aug 5" --before="Aug 10"
is a valid (but strange) thing to do.
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Especially when you're deep inside the git repository, it's not all that
trivial for scripts to figure out where GIT_DIR is if it isn't set.
So add a flag to git-rev-parse to show where it is, since it will have
figured it out anyway.
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Earlier rounds broke 'whatchanged -p'. In attempting to fix this,
make two axis of output selection in rev-parse orthogonal:
--revs-only tells it not to output things that are not revisions nor
flags that rev-list would take.
--no-revs tells it not to output things that are revisions or
flags that rev-list would take.
--flags tells it not to output parameters that do not start with
a '-'.
--no-flags tells it not to output parameters that starts with a '-'.
So for example 'rev-parse --no-revs -p arch/i386' would yield '-p arch/i386',
while 'rev-parse --no-revs --flags -p archi/i386' would give just '-p'.
Also the meaning of --verify has been made stronger. It now rejects
anything but a single valid rev argument. Earlier it passed some flags
through without complaining.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
This makes the argument to --default and any --flags arguments should up
correctly, and makes "--" together with --flags act sanely.
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
We always show the diff as an absolute path, but pathnames to diff are
taken relative to the current working directory (and if no pathnames are
given, the default ends up being all of the current working directory).
Note that "../xyz" also works, so you can do
cd linux/drivers/char
git diff ../block
and it will generate a diff of the linux/drivers/block changes.
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
I haven't audited the rev-parse users, but I am having a feeling
that many of them would choke when they expect a couple of SHA1
object names and malicious user feeds them "--max-count=6" or
somesuch to shoot himself in the foot. Anyway, this adds a
couple of missing parameters that affect the list of revs to be
returned from rev-list, not the flags that affect how they are
presented by rev-list. I think that is the intention, but I am
not quite sure.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Everybody envies rev-parse, who is the only one that can grok
the extended sha1 format. Move the get_extended_sha1() out of
rev-parse, rename it to get_sha1() and make it available to
everybody else.
The one I posted earlier to the list had one bug where it did
not handle a name that ends with a digit correctly (it
incorrectly tried the "Nth parent" path). This commit fixes it.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
The git-rev-parse command uses LF to separate each argument it
parses, so its users at least need to set IFS to LF to be able
to handle filenames with embedded SPs and TABs. Some commands,
however, can take and do expect arguments with embedded LF,
notably, "-S" (pickaxe) of diff family, so even this workaround
does not work for them.
When --sq flag to git-rev-parse is given, instead of showing one
argument per line, it outputs arguments quoted for consumption
with "eval" by the caller, to remedy this situation.
As an example, this patch converts git-whatchanged to use this
new feature.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
This sounds nonsensical, but it's useful to make sure that the result is
a commit.
For example, "git-rev-parse v2.6.12" will return the _tag_ object for
v2.6.12, but "git-rev-parse v2.6.12^0" will return the _commit_ object
associated with that tag (and v2.6.12^1 will return the first parent).
Also, since the "parent" code will actually parse the commit, this,
together with the "--verify" flag, will verify not only that the result
is a single SHA1, but will also have verified that it's a proper commit
that we can see.
This is actually subtly wrong. If a short match is found in the object
directory, but would _also_ match another SHA1 ID in a pack (or it shows
in one pack but not another), we'll never have done the pack lookup, and
we think it's unique.
I can't find it in myself to care. You really want to use enough of a
SHA1 that there is never any ambiguity.
Junio C Hamano