| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Files | Lines |
|---|
|
The instances of xdemitconf_t were initialized member by member.
Instead, initialize them to all zero, so we do not have
to update those places each time we introduce a new member.
[jc: minimally fixed by getting rid of a new global]
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
|
|
Since we have the "tree_entry_len()" helper function these days, and
don't need to do a full strlen(), there's no point in saving the path
length - it's just redundant information.
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
|
|
We currently have two parallel notation for dealing with object types
in the code: a string and a numerical value. One of them is obviously
redundent, and the most used one requires more stack space and a bunch
of strcmp() all over the place.
This is an initial step for the removal of the version using a char array
found in object reading code paths. The patch is unfortunately large but
there is no sane way to split it in smaller parts without breaking the
system.
Signed-off-by: Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
|
|
describe, git: Handle argc==0 case the same way as argc==1.
merge-tree: Refuse excessive arguments.
Signed-off-by: Dmitry V. Levin <ldv@altlinux.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
|
|
Call setup_git_directory() to make these commands work in subdirectory.
Signed-off-by: Dmitry V. Levin <ldv@altlinux.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
|
|
Like xmalloc and xrealloc xstrdup dies with a useful message if
the native strdup() implementation returns NULL rather than a
valid pointer.
I just tried to use xstrdup in new code and found it to be missing.
However I expected it to be present as xmalloc and xrealloc are
already commonly used throughout the code.
[jc: removed the part that deals with last_XXX, which I am
finding more and more dubious these days.]
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
|
|
Introduces global inline:
hashcmp(const unsigned char *sha1, const unsigned char *sha2)
Uses memcmp for comparison and returns the result based on the length of
the hash name (a future runtime decision).
Acked-by: Alex Riesen <raa.lkml@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
|
|
This fleshes out the code that generates a three-way merge of a set of
blobs.
It still actually does the three-way merge using an external executable
(ie just calling "merge"), but the interfaces have been cleaned up a lot
and are now fully based on the 'mmfile_t' interface, so if libxdiff were
to ever grow a compatible three-way-merge, it could probably be directly
plugged in.
It also uses the previous XDL_EMIT_COMMON functionality extension to
libxdiff to generate a made-up base file for the merge for the case where
no base file previously existed. This should be equivalent to what we
currently do in git-merge-one-file.sh:
diff -u -La/$orig -Lb/$orig $orig $src2 | git-apply --no-add
except it should be much simpler and can be done using the direct libxdiff
interfaces.
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
|
|
This changes how "git-merge-tree" works in two ways:
- instead of printing things out as we walk the trees, we save the
results in memory.
- when we've walked the tree fully, we print out the results in a more
explicit way, describing the data.
This is basically preparatory work for extending the git-merge-tree
functionality in interesting directions.
In particular, git-merge-tree is also how you would create a diff between
two trees _without_ necessarily creating the merge commit itself. In other
words, if you were to just wonder what another branch adds, you should be
able to (eventually) just do
git merge-tree -p $base HEAD $otherbranch
to generate a diff of what the merge would look like. The current merge
tree already basically has all the smarts for this, and the explanation of
the results just means that hopefully somebody else than me could do the
boring work.
(You'd basically be able to do the above diff by just changing the
printout format for the explanation, and making the "changed in both"
first do a three-way merge before it diffs the result).
The other thing that the in-memory format allows is rename detection
(which the current code does not do). That's the basic reason why we don't
want to just explain the differences as we go along - because we want to
be able to look at the _other_ differences to see whether the reason an
entry got deleted in either branch was perhaps because it got added in
another place..
Rename detection should be a fairly trivial pass in between the tree
diffing and the explanation.
In the meantime, this doesn't actually do anything new, it just outputs
the information in a more verbose manner.
For an example merge, commit 5ab2c0a47574c92f92ea3709b23ca35d96319edd in
the git tree works well and shows renames, along with true removals and
additions and files that got changed in both branches. To see that as a
tree merge, do:
git-merge-tree 64e86c57 c5c23745 928e47e3
where the two last ones are the tips that got merged, and the first one is
the merge base.
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
|
|
* fix:
Separate object name errors from usage errors
Documentation: {caret} fixes (git-rev-list.txt)
Fix "git diff --stat" with long filenames
Fix repo-config set-multivar error return path.
|
|
Separate object name errors from usage errors.
Signed-off-by: Dmitry V. Levin <ldv@altlinux.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
|
|
Somebody on the #git channel complained that the sha1_to_hex() thing uses
a static buffer which caused an error message to show the same hex output
twice instead of showing two different ones.
That's pretty easily rectified by making it uses a simple LRU of a few
buffers, which also allows some other users (that were aware of the buffer
re-use) to be written in a more straightforward manner.
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
|
|
Introduce tree-walk.[ch] and move "struct tree_desc" and
associated functions from various places.
Rename DIFF_FILE_CANON_MODE(mode) macro to canon_mode(mode) and
move it to cache.h. This macro returns the canonicalized
st_mode value in the host byte order for files, symlinks and
directories -- to be compared with a tree_desc entry.
create_ce_mode(mode) in cache.h is similar but is intended to be
used for index entries (so it does not work for directories) and
returns the value in the network byte order.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
|
|
It's actually very useful for other things too. Notably, we could do the
combined diff a lot more efficiently with this.
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
|
|
On Tue, 14 Feb 2006, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> Here, btw, is the trivial diff to turn my previous "tree-resolve" into a
> "resolve tree relative to the current branch".
Gaah. It was trivial, and it happened to work fine for my test-case, but
when I started looking at not doing that extremely aggressive subdirectory
merging, that showed a few other issues...
So in case people want to try, here's a third patch. Oh, and it's against
my _original_ path, not incremental to the middle one (ie both patches two
and three are against patch #1, it's not a nice series).
Now I'm really done, and won't be sending out any more patches today.
Sorry for the noise.
Linus
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
|
|
On Tue, 14 Feb 2006, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org> writes:
>
> > If somebody is interested in making the "lots of filename changes" case go
> > fast, I'd be more than happy to walk them through what they'd need to
> > change. I'm just not horribly motivated to do it myself. Hint, hint.
>
> In case anybody is wondering, I share the same feeling. I
> cannot say I'd be "more than happy to" clean up potential
> breakages during the development of such changes, but if the
> change eventually would help certain use cases, I can be
> persuaded to help debugging such a mess ;-).
Actually, I got interested in seeing how hard this is, and wrote a simple
first cut at doing a tree-optimized merger.
Let me shout a bit first:
THIS IS WORKING CODE, BUT BE CAREFUL: IT'S A TECHNOLOGY DEMONSTRATION
RATHER THAN THE FINAL PRODUCT!
With that out of the way, let me descibe what this does (and then describe
the missing parts).
This is basically a three-way merge that works entirely on the "tree"
level, rather than on the index. A lot of the _concepts_ are the same,
though, and if you're familiar with the results of an index merge, some of
the output will make more sense.
You give it three trees: the base tree (tree 0), and the two branches to
be merged (tree 1 and tree 2 respectively). It will then walk these three
trees, and resolve them as it goes along.
The interesting part is:
- it can resolve whole sub-directories in one go, without actually even
looking recursively at them. A whole subdirectory will resolve the same
way as any individual files will (although that may need some
modification, see later).
- if it has a "content conflict", for subdirectories that means "try to
do a recursive tree merge", while for non-subdirectories it's just a
content conflict and we'll output the stage 1/2/3 information.
- a successful merge will output a single stage 0 ("merged") entry,
potentially for a whole subdirectory.
- it outputs all the resolve information on stdout, so something like the
recursive resolver can pretty easily parse it all.
Now, the caveats:
- we probably need to be more careful about subdirectory resolves. The
trivial case (both branches have the exact same subdirectory) is a
trivial resolve, but the other cases ("branch1 matches base, branch2 is
different" probably can't be silently just resolved to the "branch2"
subdirectory state, since it might involve renames into - or out of -
that subdirectory)
- we do not track the current index file at all, so this does not do the
"check that index matches branch1" logic that the three-way merge in
git-read-tree does. The theory is that we'd do a full three-way merge
(ignoring the index and working directory), and then to update the
working tree, we'd do a two-way "git-read-tree branch1->result"
- I didn't actually make it do all the trivial resolve cases that
git-read-tree does. It's a technology demonstration.
Finally (a more serious caveat):
- doing things through stdout may end up being so expensive that we'd
need to do something else. In particular, it's likely that I should
not actually output the "merge results", but instead output a "merge
results as they _differ_ from branch1"
However, I think this patch is already interesting enough that people who
are interested in merging trees might want to look at it. Please keep in
mind that tech _demo_ part, and in particular, keep in mind the final
"serious caveat" part.
In many ways, the really _interesting_ part of a merge is not the result,
but how it _changes_ the branch we're merging into. That's particularly
important as it should hopefully also mean that the output size for any
reasonable case is minimal (and tracks what we actually need to do to the
current state to create the final result).
The code very much is organized so that doing the result as a "diff
against branch1" should be quite easy/possible. I was actually going to do
it, but I decided that it probably makes the output harder to read. I
dunno.
Anyway, let's think about this kind of approach.. Note how the code itself
is actually quite small and short, although it's prbably pretty "dense".
As an interesting test-case, I'd suggest this merge in the kernel:
git-merge-tree $(git-merge-base 4cbf876 7d2babc) 4cbf876 7d2babc
which resolves beautifully (there are no actual file-level conflicts), and
you can look at the output of that command to start thinking about what
it does.
The interesting part (perhaps) is that timing that command for me shows
that it takes all of 0.004 seconds.. (the git-merge-base thing takes
considerably more ;)
The point is, we _can_ do the actual merge part really really quickly.
Linus
PS. Final note: when I say that it is "WORKING CODE", that is obviously by
my standards. IOW, I tested it once and it gave reasonable results - so it
must be perfect.
Whether it works for anybody else, or indeed for any other test-case, is
not my problem ;)
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
|
|
It's there in the history if somebody wants to resurrect it, but it
seems to have been successfully superceded by the new and improved
index-merge thing, where we do all merging entirely in the index.
|
|
This adds '-z' to merge-tree and changes its default line termination to
LF to make it consistent with your other recent changes.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
|
|
It only works one directory level at a time, so lookout..
|
Johannes Schindelin
Linus Torvalds
Nicolas Pitre
Dmitry V. Levin
Shawn Pearce
David Rientjes
Linus Torvalds
Junio C Hamano
Linus Torvalds