From 65347030590bcc251a9ff2ed96487a0f1b9e9fa8 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Junio C Hamano Date: Sun, 3 Aug 2008 17:47:16 -0700 Subject: Topo-sort before --simplify-merges This makes the algorithm more honest about what it is doing. We start from an already limited, topo-sorted list, and postprocess it by simplifying the irrelevant merges away. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano --- t/t6012-rev-list-simplify.sh | 93 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 93 insertions(+) create mode 100755 t/t6012-rev-list-simplify.sh (limited to 't') diff --git a/t/t6012-rev-list-simplify.sh b/t/t6012-rev-list-simplify.sh new file mode 100755 index 0000000000..510bb9679f --- /dev/null +++ b/t/t6012-rev-list-simplify.sh @@ -0,0 +1,93 @@ +#!/bin/sh + +test_description='merge simplification' + +. ./test-lib.sh + +note () { + git tag "$1" +} + +_x40='[0-9a-f][0-9a-f][0-9a-f][0-9a-f][0-9a-f]' +_x40="$_x40$_x40$_x40$_x40$_x40$_x40$_x40$_x40" + +unnote () { + git name-rev --tags --stdin | sed -e "s|$_x40 (tags/\([^)]*\)) |\1 |g" +} + +test_expect_success setup ' + echo "Hi there" >file && + git add file && + test_tick && git commit -m "Initial file" && + note A && + + git branch other-branch && + + echo "Hello" >file && + git add file && + test_tick && git commit -m "Modified file" && + note B && + + git checkout other-branch && + + echo "Hello" >file && + git add file && + test_tick && git commit -m "Modified the file identically" && + note C && + + echo "This is a stupid example" >another-file && + git add another-file && + test_tick && git commit -m "Add another file" && + note D && + + test_tick && git merge -m "merge" master && + note E && + + echo "Yet another" >elif && + git add elif && + test_tick && git commit -m "Irrelevant change" && + note F && + + git checkout master && + echo "Yet another" >elif && + git add elif && + test_tick && git commit -m "Another irrelevant change" && + note G && + + test_tick && git merge -m "merge" other-branch && + note H && + + echo "Final change" >file && + test_tick && git commit -a -m "Final change" && + note I +' + +FMT='tformat:%P %H | %s' + +check_result () { + for c in $1 + do + echo "$c" + done >expect && + shift && + param="$*" && + test_expect_success "log $param" ' + git log --pretty="$FMT" --parents $param | + unnote >actual && + sed -e "s/^.* \([^ ]*\) .*/\1/" >check Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2008 10:45:57 +0200 Subject: filter-branch: Extend test to show rewriting bug This extends the --subdirectory-filter test in t7003 to demonstrate a rewriting bug: when rewriting two refs A and B such that B is an ancestor of A, it fails to rewrite B. The underlying issue is that the rev-list invocation at git-filter-branch.sh:332 more or less boils down to git rev-list B --boundary ^A which outputs nothing because B is an ancestor of A. Signed-off-by: Thomas Rast Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano --- t/t7003-filter-branch.sh | 10 +++++++--- 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) (limited to 't') diff --git a/t/t7003-filter-branch.sh b/t/t7003-filter-branch.sh index a0ab096c8f..4382baa27d 100755 --- a/t/t7003-filter-branch.sh +++ b/t/t7003-filter-branch.sh @@ -96,13 +96,17 @@ test_expect_success 'filter subdirectory only' ' test_tick && git commit -m "again not subdir" && git branch sub && - git-filter-branch -f --subdirectory-filter subdir refs/heads/sub + git branch sub-earlier HEAD~2 && + git-filter-branch -f --subdirectory-filter subdir \ + refs/heads/sub refs/heads/sub-earlier ' -test_expect_success 'subdirectory filter result looks okay' ' +test_expect_failure 'subdirectory filter result looks okay' ' test 2 = $(git rev-list sub | wc -l) && git show sub:new && - test_must_fail git show sub:subdir + test_must_fail git show sub:subdir && + git show sub-earlier:new && + test_must_fail git show sub-earlier:subdir ' test_expect_success 'more setup' ' -- cgit v1.2.1 From a0e46390d397e71182e42930b98b6b59a1a84898 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Thomas Rast Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2008 10:45:58 +0200 Subject: filter-branch: fix ref rewriting with --subdirectory-filter The previous ancestor discovery code failed on any refs that are (pre-rewrite) ancestors of commits marked for rewriting. This means that in a situation A -- B(topic) -- C(master) where B is dropped by --subdirectory-filter pruning, the 'topic' was not moved up to A as intended, but left unrewritten because we asked about 'git rev-list ^master topic', which does not return anything. Instead, we use the straightforward git rev-list -1 $ref -- $filter_subdir to find the right ancestor. To justify this, note that the nearest ancestor is unique: We use the output of git rev-list --parents -- $filter_subdir to rewrite commits in the first pass, before any ref rewriting. If B is a non-merge commit, the only candidate is its parent. If it is a merge, there are two cases: - All sides of the merge bring the same subdirectory contents. Then rev-list already pruned away the merge in favour for just one of its parents, so there is only one candidate. - Some merge sides, or the merge outcome, differ. Then the merge is not pruned and can be rewritten directly. So it is always safe to use rev-list -1. Signed-off-by: Thomas Rast Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano --- t/t7003-filter-branch.sh | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) (limited to 't') diff --git a/t/t7003-filter-branch.sh b/t/t7003-filter-branch.sh index 4382baa27d..233254f2b5 100755 --- a/t/t7003-filter-branch.sh +++ b/t/t7003-filter-branch.sh @@ -101,7 +101,7 @@ test_expect_success 'filter subdirectory only' ' refs/heads/sub refs/heads/sub-earlier ' -test_expect_failure 'subdirectory filter result looks okay' ' +test_expect_success 'subdirectory filter result looks okay' ' test 2 = $(git rev-list sub | wc -l) && git show sub:new && test_must_fail git show sub:subdir && -- cgit v1.2.1