-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Debug option #2
Labels
Comments
albfan
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
Jul 9, 2014
Closing (not redirecting to /dev/null) the standard error stream is not a very smart thing to do. Later open may return file descriptor #2 for unrelated purpose, and error reporting code may write into them. * tr/perl-keep-stderr-open: t9700: do not close STDERR perl: redirect stderr to /dev/null instead of closing
albfan
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
Jul 9, 2014
The DWIM mode of checkout allows you to run "git checkout foo" when there is no existing local ref or path called "foo", and there is exactly _one_ remote with a remote-tracking branch called "foo". Git will automatically create a new local branch called "foo" using the remote-tracking "foo" as its starting point and configured upstream. For example, consider the following unconventional (but perfectly valid) remote setup: [remote "origin"] fetch = refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/origin/* [remote "frotz"] fetch = refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/frotz/nitfol/* Case 1: Assume both "origin" and "frotz" have remote-tracking branches called "foo", at "refs/remotes/origin/foo" and "refs/remotes/frotz/nitfol/foo" respectively. In this case "git checkout foo" should fail, because there is more than one remote with a "foo" branch. Case 2: Assume only "frotz" have a remote-tracking branch called "foo". In this case "git checkout foo" should succeed, and create a local branch "foo" from "refs/remotes/frotz/nitfol/foo", using remote branch "foo" from "frotz" as its upstream. The current code hardcodes the assumption that all remote-tracking branches must match the "refs/remotes/$remote/*" pattern (which is true for remotes with "conventional" refspecs, but not true for the "frotz" remote above). When running "git checkout foo", the current code looks for exactly one ref matching "refs/remotes/*/foo", hence in the above example, it fails to find "refs/remotes/frotz/nitfol/foo", which causes it to fail both case #1 and #2. The better way to handle the above example is to actually study the fetch refspecs to deduce the candidate remote-tracking branches for "foo"; i.e. assume "foo" is a remote branch being fetched, and then map "refs/heads/foo" through the refspecs in order to get the corresponding remote-tracking branches "refs/remotes/origin/foo" and "refs/remotes/frotz/nitfol/foo". Finally we check which of these happens to exist in the local repo, and if there is exactly one, we have an unambiguous match for "git checkout foo", and may proceed. This fixes most of the failing tests introduced in the previous patch. Signed-off-by: Johan Herland <johan@herland.net> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
albfan
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
Jul 9, 2014
We have two ways of dealing with empty pathspec: 1. limit it to current prefix 2. match the entire working directory Some commands go with #1, some #2. get_pathspec() and parse_pathspec() only support #1. Make parse_pathspec() reject empty pathspec by default. #1 and #2 can be specified via new flags. This makes it more expressive about default behavior at command level. Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
albfan
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
Jul 9, 2014
In 41c21f2 (branch.c: Validate tracking branches with refspecs instead of refs/remotes/*), we changed the rules for what is considered a valid tracking branch (a.k.a. upstream branch). We now use the configured remotes and their refspecs to determine whether a proposed tracking branch is in fact within the domain of a remote, and we then use that information to deduce the upstream configuration (branch.<name>.remote and branch.<name>.merge). However, with that change, we also check that - in addition to a matching refspec - the result of mapping the tracking branch through that refspec (i.e. the corresponding ref name in the remote repo) happens to start with "refs/heads/". In other words, we require that a tracking branch refers to a _branch_ in the remote repo. Now, consider that you are e.g. setting up an automated building/testing infrastructure for a group of similar "source" repositories. The build/test infrastructure consists of a central scheduler, and a number of build/test "slave" machines that perform the actual build/test work. The scheduler monitors the group of similar repos for changes (e.g. with a periodic "git fetch"), and triggers builds/tests to be run on one or more slaves. Graphically the changes flow between the repos like this: Source #1 -------v ----> Slave #1 / Source #2 -----> Scheduler -----> Slave #2 \ Source #3 -------^ ----> Slave #3 ... ... The scheduler maintains a single Git repo with each of the source repos set up as distinct remotes. The slaves also need access to all the changes from all of the source repos, so they pull from the scheduler repo, but using the following custom refspec: remote.origin.fetch = "+refs/remotes/*:refs/remotes/*" This makes all of the scheduler's remote-tracking branches automatically available as identical remote-tracking branches in each of the slaves. Now, consider what happens if a slave tries to create a local branch with one of the remote-tracking branches as upstream: git branch local_branch --track refs/remotes/source-1/some_branch Git now looks at the configured remotes (in this case there is only "origin", pointing to the scheduler's repo) and sees refs/remotes/source-1/some_branch matching origin's refspec. Mapping through that refspec we find that the corresponding remote ref name is "refs/remotes/source-1/some_branch". However, since this remote ref name does not start with "refs/heads/", we discard it as a suitable upstream, and the whole command fails. This patch adds a testcase demonstrating this failure by creating two source repos ("a" and "b") that are forwarded through a scheduler ("c") to a slave repo ("d"), that then tries create a local branch with an upstream. See the next patch in this series for the exciting conclusion to this story... Reported-by: Per Cederqvist <cederp@opera.com> Signed-off-by: Johan Herland <johan@herland.net> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Option to deactivate code which hangs using a debugger.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: