| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Files | Lines |
|---|
|
Recently I found that doing a sequence like the following:
git-new-workdir a b
...
git-new-workdir a b
by accident will cause a (and now also b) to have an infinite cycle
in its refs directory. This is caused by git-new-workdir trying
to create the "refs" symlink over again, only during the second
time it is being created within a's refs directory and is now also
pointing back at a's refs.
This causes confusion in git as suddenly branches are named things
like "refs/refs/refs/refs/refs/refs/refs/heads/foo" instead of the
more commonly accepted "refs/heads/foo". Plenty of commands start
to see ambiguous ref names and others just take ages to compute.
git-clone has the same safety check, so git-new-workdir should
behave just like it.
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
|
|
If core.bare is set to true in the config file of a repository that
the user is trying to create a working directory from we should
abort and suggest to the user that they remove the option first.
If we leave the core.bare=true setting in the config file then
working tree operations will get confused when they attempt to
execute in the new workdir, as it shares its config file with the
bare repository. The working tree operations will assume that the
workdir is bare and abort, which is not what the user wants.
If we changed core.bare to be false then working tree operations
will function in the workdir but other operations may fail in the
bare repository, as it claims to not be bare.
If we remove core.bare from the config then Git can fallback on
the legacy guessing behavior. This allows operations in the bare
repository to work as though it were bare, while operations in the
workdirs to act as though they are not bare.
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
|
|
My day-job workflow involves using multiple workdirs attached to a
bunch of bare repositories. Such repositories are stored inside of
a directory called "foo.git", which means `git rev-parse --git-dir`
will return "." and not ".git". Under such conditions new-workdir
was getting confused about where the Git repository it was supplied
is actually located.
If we get "." for the result of --git-dir query it means we should
use the user supplied path as-is, and not attempt to perform any
magic on it, as the path is directly to the repository.
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
|
|
Use = instead of == with test to test for equality.
Signed-off-by: Simon Hausmann <simon@lst.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
|
|
rev-parse --git-dir outputs a full path - except for the single case
of when the path would be $(pwd)/.git, in which case it outputs simply
.git. Check for this special case and handle it.
Signed-off-by: Julian Phillips <julian@quantumfyre.co.uk>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
|
|
On one particular system I like to keep a cluster of bare Git
repositories and spawn new-workdirs off of them. Since the bare
repositories don't have working directories associated with them
they don't have a .git/ subdirectory that hosts the repository we
are linking to.
Using a bare repository as the backing repository for a workdir
created by this script does require that the user delete core.bare
from the repository's configuration file, so that Git auto-senses
the bareness of a repository based on pathname information, and
not based on the config file.
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
|
|
Add a simple script to create a working directory that uses symlinks
to point at an exisiting repository. This allows having different
branches in different working directories but all from the same
repository.
Based on a description from Junio of how he creates multiple working
directories[1]. With the following caveat:
"This risks confusion for an uninitiated if you update a ref that
is checked out in another working tree, but modulo that caveat
it works reasonably well."
[1] http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/41513/
Signed-off-by: Julian Phillips <julian@quantumfyre.co.uk>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
|
Shawn O. Pearce
Simon Hausmann
Julian Phillips