[sort-of-BUG] merge-resolve cannot resolve "content/mode" conflict

2016-04-02 Thread Jeff King
Imagine a merge where one side changes the content of a path and the other changes the mode. Here's a minimal reproduction: git init repo && cd repo && echo base >file && git add file && git commit -m base && echo changed >file && git commit -am content && git checkout -b side

Re: [PATCH v3 4/4] tag: use pgp_verify_function in tag -v call

2016-04-02 Thread Jeff King
On Sat, Apr 02, 2016 at 07:16:15PM -0400, santi...@nyu.edu wrote: > diff --git a/builtin/tag.c b/builtin/tag.c > index 1705c94..3dffdff 100644 > --- a/builtin/tag.c > +++ b/builtin/tag.c > @@ -65,9 +65,10 @@ static int list_tags(struct ref_filter *filter, struct > ref_sorting *sorting, con > }

Re: [PATCH v3 3/4] builtin/verify-tag: move verification code to tag.c

2016-04-02 Thread Jeff King
On Sat, Apr 02, 2016 at 07:16:14PM -0400, santi...@nyu.edu wrote: > From: Santiago Torres > > The PGP verification routine for tags could be accessed by other > commands that require it. We do this by moving it to the common tag.c > code. We rename the verify_tag() function to

Re: [PATCH v3 2/4] t/t7030-verify-tag.sh: Adds validation for multiple tags

2016-04-02 Thread Jeff King
On Sat, Apr 02, 2016 at 07:16:13PM -0400, santi...@nyu.edu wrote: > The verify-tag command supports mutliple tag names as an argument. s/mutliple/multiple/ > +test_expect_success GPG 'verify multiple tags' ' > + git verify-tag -v --raw fourth-signed sixth-signed seventh-signed > 2>actual

Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] builtin/verify-tag.c: Ignore SIGPIPE on gpg-interface

2016-04-02 Thread Jeff King
On Sat, Apr 02, 2016 at 07:16:12PM -0400, santi...@nyu.edu wrote: > From: Santiago Torres > > The verify_signed_buffer comand might cause a SIGPIPE signal when the > gpg child process terminates early (due to a bad keyid, for example) and > git tries to write to it afterwards.

[PATCH] branch: fix shortening of non-remote symrefs

2016-04-02 Thread Jeff King
On Sun, Apr 03, 2016 at 02:54:22PM +1200, Phil Sainty wrote: > Given the following symbolic reference: > > $ git symbolic-ref refs/heads/m refs/heads/master > > > Correct in 2.6.6: > > $ PATH=~/git/git-2.6.6:$PATH git branch > m -> master > * master > > > Wrong in 2.7.0: > > $

RFD: removing git.spec.in (Re: git 2.8.0 tarball rpmbuild error)

2016-04-02 Thread Junio C Hamano
It is likely that I'll cut 2.8.1 with only the attached patch Message-ID: <1459494651-32618-1-git-send-email-matthieu@imag.fr> aka $gmane/290510 and I'll explicitly mark that this maintenance release is ignorable by people other than those who build their own RPM packages from my

Since 2.7.0 git branch displays symbolic references as ref -> ref instead of ref -> branch

2016-04-02 Thread Phil Sainty
Given the following symbolic reference: $ git symbolic-ref refs/heads/m refs/heads/master Correct in 2.6.6: $ PATH=~/git/git-2.6.6:$PATH git branch m -> master * master Wrong in 2.7.0: $ PATH=~/git/git-2.7.0:$PATH git branch m -> m * master Still wrong in current version 2.8.0: $

Re: Bug Report

2016-04-02 Thread Jacob Keller
Hi, On Sat, Apr 2, 2016 at 5:25 PM, Benjamin Sandeen wrote: > Today, I managed to create a duplicate branch in a git repository. While > this may not be a bug per se, I do think that it is confusing and some way > of preventing such issues in the future

Re: Bug Report

2016-04-02 Thread Eric N. Vander Weele
On Sat, Apr 2, 2016 at 8:25 PM, Benjamin Sandeen wrote: > Today, I managed to create a duplicate branch in a git repository. While > this may not be a bug per se, I do think that it is confusing and some way > of preventing such issues in the future may be

[PATCH] builtin/log.c: fixup format-patch --base segfault

2016-04-02 Thread Ramsay Jones
Signed-off-by: Ramsay Jones --- Hi Xiaolong, When you next re-roll your 'xy/format-patch-base' branch could you please squash this (or something like it) into the relevant patch. (commit 50ff6afd, "format-patch: add '--base' option to record base tree info",

Bug Report

2016-04-02 Thread Benjamin Sandeen
Today, I managed to create a duplicate branch in a git repository. While this may not be a bug per se, I do think that it is confusing and some way of preventing such issues in the future may be helpful. I first cloned the repository: $ git clone https://github.com/CodeForChicago/superclass.git

[PATCH v12 5/5] commit: add a commit.verbose config variable

2016-04-02 Thread Pranit Bauva
Add commit.verbose configuration variable as a convenience for those who always prefer --verbose. Helped-by: Junio C Hamano Helped-by: Eric Sunshine Signed-off-by: Pranit Bauva --- The previous version of the patch are: -

[PATCH v12 1/5] t0040-test-parse-options.sh: fix style issues

2016-04-02 Thread Pranit Bauva
Signed-off-by: Pranit Bauva --- Changes wrt previous version (v11): - This patch is a split up of patch 1/4 v11 as requested by Junio. - This patch uses the backslash with EOF as suggested by Junio for 2 tests namely "detect possible typos" ---

[PATCH v12 2/5] test-parse-options: print quiet as integer

2016-04-02 Thread Pranit Bauva
Current implementation of parse-options.c treats OPT__QUIET() as integer and not boolean and thus it is more appropriate to print it as integer to avoid confusion. Signed-off-by: Pranit Bauva --- t/t0040-parse-options.sh | 26 +-

[PATCH v12 3/5] parse-options.c: make OPTION_COUNTUP respect "unspecified" values

2016-04-02 Thread Pranit Bauva
The reason to make it respect "unspecified" values is to give the ability to differentiate whether `--option` or `--no-option` was specified at all. "unspecified" values should be in the form of negative values. If initial value is set to negative and `--option` specified then it will reflect the

[PATCH v12 4/5] t7507-commit-verbose: improve test coverage by testing number of diffs

2016-04-02 Thread Pranit Bauva
Make the fake "editor" store output of grep in a file so that we can see how many diffs were contained in the message and use them in individual tests where ever it is required. Also use write_script() to create the fake "editor". A subsequent commit will introduce scenarios where it is important

[PATCH v3 2/4] t/t7030-verify-tag.sh: Adds validation for multiple tags

2016-04-02 Thread santiago
From: Santiago Torres The verify-tag command supports mutliple tag names as an argument. However, no previous tests try to verify multiple tags at once. This test runs the verify-tag command against three trusted tags (created previously), and ensures that: 1) Three

[PATCH v3 4/4] tag: use pgp_verify_function in tag -v call

2016-04-02 Thread santiago
From: Santiago Torres Instead of running the verify-tag plumbing command, we use the pgp_verify_tag(). This avoids the usage of an extra fork call. To do this, we extend the number of parameters that tag.c takes, and verify-tag passes. Redundant calls done in the pgp_verify_tag

[PATCH v3 3/4] builtin/verify-tag: move verification code to tag.c

2016-04-02 Thread santiago
From: Santiago Torres The PGP verification routine for tags could be accessed by other commands that require it. We do this by moving it to the common tag.c code. We rename the verify_tag() function to pgp_verify_tag() to avoid conflicts with the mktag.c function.

[PATCH v3 1/4] builtin/verify-tag.c: Ignore SIGPIPE on gpg-interface

2016-04-02 Thread santiago
From: Santiago Torres The verify_signed_buffer comand might cause a SIGPIPE signal when the gpg child process terminates early (due to a bad keyid, for example) and git tries to write to it afterwards. Previously, ignoring SIGPIPE was done on the builtin/gpg-verify.c command to

[PATCH v3 0/4] tag: move PGP verification code to tag.c

2016-04-02 Thread santiago
This is a follow up of [1] and [2]: v3 (this): Thanks Eric, Jeff, for the feedback. * I separated the patch in multiple sub-patches. * I compared the behavior of previous git tag -v and git verify-tag invocations to make sure the behavior is the same * I dropped the multi-line comment, as

Re: [PATCH 0/2] mergetools: add support for ExamDiff

2016-04-02 Thread David Aguilar
On Fri, Apr 01, 2016 at 11:10:56AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Jacob Nisnevich writes: > > > OK I add the quotes and modified the comment. I also changed $folder to > > $sub_directory. I think that makes a little bit more sense and sounds a lot > > better. > > > >

Re: [PATCH 1/4] config --show-origin: report paths with forward slashes

2016-04-02 Thread Johannes Sixt
Am 29.03.2016 um 22:05 schrieb Junio C Hamano: > Johannes Sixt writes: > >> This part of your 45bf3297 (t1300: fix the new --show-origin tests on >> Windows) >> >> @@ -1205,6 +1205,9 @@ test_expect_success POSIXPERM,PERL 'preserves existing >> per >>"die q(badrename)

Re: [PATCH 1/4] config --show-origin: report paths with forward slashes

2016-04-02 Thread Johannes Sixt
Am 30.03.2016 um 07:52 schrieb Johannes Sixt: Am 29.03.2016 um 21:18 schrieb Johannes Sixt: It does pass. The reason is that pwd -W generates forward slashes. It just occurred to me that we might be observing a difference in behavior of pwd -W between the modern MSYS2 bash and the old MSYS1

Re: [PATCH v2 6/7] t5520: reduce commom lines of code

2016-04-02 Thread Johannes Sixt
Am 02.04.2016 um 19:58 schrieb Mehul Jain: These two tests are almost similar and thus can be folded in a for-loop. Helped-by: Eric Sunshine Signed-off-by: Mehul Jain --- t/t5520-pull.sh | 16 +++- 1 file changed, 7

[PATCH v2 5/7] t5520: factor out common code

2016-04-02 Thread Mehul Jain
Three tests contains repetitive lines of code. Factor out common code into test_pull_autostash_fail() and then call it in these tests. Helped-by: Eric Sunshine Signed-off-by: Mehul Jain --- t/t5520-pull.sh | 26 +++--- 1

[PATCH v2 7/7] t5520: test --[no-]autostash with pull.rebase=true

2016-04-02 Thread Mehul Jain
"--[no-]autostash" option for git-pull is only valid in rebase mode( i.e. either --rebase should be used or pull.rebase=true). Existing tests already check the cases when --rebase is used but fails to check for pull.rebase=true case. Add two new tests to check that --[no-]autostash option works

[PATCH v2 6/7] t5520: reduce commom lines of code

2016-04-02 Thread Mehul Jain
These two tests are almost similar and thus can be folded in a for-loop. Helped-by: Eric Sunshine Signed-off-by: Mehul Jain --- t/t5520-pull.sh | 16 +++- 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) diff --git

[PATCH v2 4/7] t5520: factor out common code

2016-04-02 Thread Mehul Jain
Four tests contains repetitive lines of code. Factor out common code into test_pull_autostash() and then call it in these tests. Helped-by: Eric Sunshine Signed-off-by: Mehul Jain --- t/t5520-pull.sh | 44

[PATCH v2 3/7] t5520: use better test to check stderr output

2016-04-02 Thread Mehul Jain
Checking stderr output using test_i18ncmp may lead to test failure as some shells write trace output to stderr when run under 'set -x'. Use test_i18ngrep instead of test_i18ncmp. Signed-off-by: Mehul Jain --- t/t5520-pull.sh | 10 -- 1 file changed, 4

[PATCH v2 1/7] t5520: use consistent capitalization in test titles

2016-04-02 Thread Mehul Jain
Signed-off-by: Mehul Jain --- t/t5520-pull.sh | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/t/t5520-pull.sh b/t/t5520-pull.sh index 745e59e..5be39df 100755 --- a/t/t5520-pull.sh +++ b/t/t5520-pull.sh @@ -267,7 +267,7 @@ test_expect_success

[PATCH v2 2/7] t5520: ensure consistent test conditions

2016-04-02 Thread Mehul Jain
Test title says that tests are done with rebase.autostash unset, but does not take any action to make sure that it is indeed unset. This may lead to test failure if future changes somehow pollutes the configuration globally. Ensure consistent test conditions by explicitly unsetting

[PATCH v2 0/7] t5520: tests for --[no-]autostash option

2016-04-02 Thread Mehul Jain
The following series is applicable on mj/pull-rebase-autostash. Thanks Eric and Junio for there comments on previous version[1] Changes made vs v1: * [Patch v1 4/5] is broken into three patches to increase readability of the patches. * [Patch 4/5]

Re: Merge driver not called for locally modified files?

2016-04-02 Thread Junio C Hamano
Gioele Barabucci writes: > it seems to me that merge drivers are not called while merging commits > that touch locally modified (but uncommited) files. Is this correct? Yes. "git merge" first notices this situation and stops before it has to decide which merge driver to use.

Re: git 2.8.0 tarball rpmbuild error

2016-04-02 Thread Todd Zullinger
Pranit Bauva wrote: On Sat, Apr 2, 2016 at 9:18 PM, マッチョコ太郎 wrote: hi I downloaded tarball (tar.gz) from git web site and tried to make rpm file. But, when I run command "$rpmbuild -tb --clean git-2.8.0.tar.gz", error message is displayed and rpm file creation stopped.

[PATCH] spec: Adjust README name

2016-04-02 Thread Todd Zullinger
The README file moved to README.md in ad21f5 (README: use markdown syntax, 2016-02-25). Reported-by: マッチョコ太郎 Signed-off-by: Todd Zullinger --- Hi, マッチョコ太郎 wrote: hi I downloaded tarball (tar.gz) from git web site and tried to make rpm file. But, when

Re: git 2.8.0 tarball rpmbuild error

2016-04-02 Thread Pranit Bauva
On Sat, Apr 2, 2016 at 9:18 PM, マッチョコ太郎 wrote: > hi > I downloaded tarball (tar.gz) from git web site and tried to make rpm file. > But, when I run command "$rpmbuild -tb --clean git-2.8.0.tar.gz", > error message is displayed and rpm file creation stopped. > The error

git 2.8.0 tarball rpmbuild error

2016-04-02 Thread マッチョコ太郎
hi I downloaded tarball (tar.gz) from git web site and tried to make rpm file. But, when I run command "$rpmbuild -tb --clean git-2.8.0.tar.gz", error message is displayed and rpm file creation stopped. The error message is looks like this: cp -pr README

Merge driver not called for locally modified files?

2016-04-02 Thread Gioele Barabucci
Hello, it seems to me that merge drivers are not called while merging commits that touch locally modified (but uncommited) files. Is this correct? I made a (simple) merge driver for files in the `pw` format. [1] This driver works correctly when a file is modified by multiple commits. However, if