git/sequencer.c

1632 строки
44 KiB
C
Исходник Обычный вид История

#include "cache.h"
#include "lockfile.h"
#include "sequencer.h"
#include "dir.h"
#include "object.h"
#include "commit.h"
#include "tag.h"
#include "run-command.h"
#include "exec_cmd.h"
#include "utf8.h"
#include "cache-tree.h"
#include "diff.h"
#include "revision.h"
#include "rerere.h"
#include "merge-recursive.h"
#include "refs.h"
#include "argv-array.h"
#include "quote.h"
#include "trailer.h"
#include "log-tree.h"
#define GIT_REFLOG_ACTION "GIT_REFLOG_ACTION"
const char sign_off_header[] = "Signed-off-by: ";
static const char cherry_picked_prefix[] = "(cherry picked from commit ";
GIT_PATH_FUNC(git_path_seq_dir, "sequencer")
static GIT_PATH_FUNC(git_path_todo_file, "sequencer/todo")
static GIT_PATH_FUNC(git_path_opts_file, "sequencer/opts")
static GIT_PATH_FUNC(git_path_head_file, "sequencer/head")
static GIT_PATH_FUNC(git_path_abort_safety_file, "sequencer/abort-safety")
memoize common git-path "constant" files One of the most common uses of git_path() is to pass a constant, like git_path("MERGE_MSG"). This has two drawbacks: 1. The return value is a static buffer, and the lifetime is dependent on other calls to git_path, etc. 2. There's no compile-time checking of the pathname. This is OK for a one-off (after all, we have to spell it correctly at least once), but many of these constant strings appear throughout the code. This patch introduces a series of functions to "memoize" these strings, which are essentially globals for the lifetime of the program. We compute the value once, take ownership of the buffer, and return the cached value for subsequent calls. cache.h provides a helper macro for defining these functions as one-liners, and defines a few common ones for global use. Using a macro is a little bit gross, but it does nicely document the purpose of the functions. If we need to touch them all later (e.g., because we learned how to change the git_dir variable at runtime, and need to invalidate all of the stored values), it will be much easier to have the complete list. Note that the shared-global functions have separate, manual declarations. We could do something clever with the macros (e.g., expand it to a declaration in some places, and a declaration _and_ a definition in path.c). But there aren't that many, and it's probably better to stay away from too-magical macros. Likewise, if we abandon the C preprocessor in favor of generating these with a script, we could get much fancier. E.g., normalizing "FOO/BAR-BAZ" into "git_path_foo_bar_baz". But the small amount of saved typing is probably not worth the resulting confusion to readers who want to grep for the function's definition. Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2015-08-10 12:38:57 +03:00
static GIT_PATH_FUNC(rebase_path, "rebase-merge")
/*
* The file containing rebase commands, comments, and empty lines.
* This file is created by "git rebase -i" then edited by the user. As
* the lines are processed, they are removed from the front of this
* file and written to the tail of 'done'.
*/
static GIT_PATH_FUNC(rebase_path_todo, "rebase-merge/git-rebase-todo")
/*
* A script to set the GIT_AUTHOR_NAME, GIT_AUTHOR_EMAIL, and
* GIT_AUTHOR_DATE that will be used for the commit that is currently
* being rebased.
*/
static GIT_PATH_FUNC(rebase_path_author_script, "rebase-merge/author-script")
/*
* When an "edit" rebase command is being processed, the SHA1 of the
* commit to be edited is recorded in this file. When "git rebase
* --continue" is executed, if there are any staged changes then they
* will be amended to the HEAD commit, but only provided the HEAD
* commit is still the commit to be edited. When any other rebase
* command is processed, this file is deleted.
*/
static GIT_PATH_FUNC(rebase_path_amend, "rebase-merge/amend")
/*
* When we stop at a given patch via the "edit" command, this file contains
* the abbreviated commit name of the corresponding patch.
*/
static GIT_PATH_FUNC(rebase_path_stopped_sha, "rebase-merge/stopped-sha")
/*
* The following files are written by git-rebase just after parsing the
* command-line (and are only consumed, not modified, by the sequencer).
*/
static GIT_PATH_FUNC(rebase_path_gpg_sign_opt, "rebase-merge/gpg_sign_opt")
static inline int is_rebase_i(const struct replay_opts *opts)
{
return opts->action == REPLAY_INTERACTIVE_REBASE;
}
static const char *get_dir(const struct replay_opts *opts)
{
if (is_rebase_i(opts))
return rebase_path();
return git_path_seq_dir();
}
static const char *get_todo_path(const struct replay_opts *opts)
{
if (is_rebase_i(opts))
return rebase_path_todo();
return git_path_todo_file();
}
/*
* Returns 0 for non-conforming footer
* Returns 1 for conforming footer
* Returns 2 when sob exists within conforming footer
* Returns 3 when sob exists within conforming footer as last entry
*/
static int has_conforming_footer(struct strbuf *sb, struct strbuf *sob,
int ignore_footer)
{
struct trailer_info info;
int i;
int found_sob = 0, found_sob_last = 0;
trailer_info_get(&info, sb->buf);
if (info.trailer_start == info.trailer_end)
return 0;
for (i = 0; i < info.trailer_nr; i++)
if (sob && !strncmp(info.trailers[i], sob->buf, sob->len)) {
found_sob = 1;
if (i == info.trailer_nr - 1)
found_sob_last = 1;
}
trailer_info_release(&info);
if (found_sob_last)
return 3;
if (found_sob)
return 2;
return 1;
}
static const char *gpg_sign_opt_quoted(struct replay_opts *opts)
{
static struct strbuf buf = STRBUF_INIT;
strbuf_reset(&buf);
if (opts->gpg_sign)
sq_quotef(&buf, "-S%s", opts->gpg_sign);
return buf.buf;
}
int sequencer_remove_state(struct replay_opts *opts)
{
struct strbuf dir = STRBUF_INIT;
int i;
free(opts->gpg_sign);
free(opts->strategy);
for (i = 0; i < opts->xopts_nr; i++)
free(opts->xopts[i]);
free(opts->xopts);
strbuf_addf(&dir, "%s", get_dir(opts));
remove_dir_recursively(&dir, 0);
strbuf_release(&dir);
return 0;
}
static const char *action_name(const struct replay_opts *opts)
{
switch (opts->action) {
case REPLAY_REVERT:
return N_("revert");
case REPLAY_PICK:
return N_("cherry-pick");
case REPLAY_INTERACTIVE_REBASE:
return N_("rebase -i");
}
die(_("Unknown action: %d"), opts->action);
}
struct commit_message {
char *parent_label;
char *label;
char *subject;
const char *message;
};
static const char *short_commit_name(struct commit *commit)
{
return find_unique_abbrev(commit->object.oid.hash, DEFAULT_ABBREV);
}
static int get_message(struct commit *commit, struct commit_message *out)
{
const char *abbrev, *subject;
int subject_len;
out->message = logmsg_reencode(commit, NULL, get_commit_output_encoding());
abbrev = short_commit_name(commit);
subject_len = find_commit_subject(out->message, &subject);
out->subject = xmemdupz(subject, subject_len);
out->label = xstrfmt("%s... %s", abbrev, out->subject);
out->parent_label = xstrfmt("parent of %s", out->label);
return 0;
}
static void free_message(struct commit *commit, struct commit_message *msg)
{
free(msg->parent_label);
free(msg->label);
free(msg->subject);
unuse_commit_buffer(commit, msg->message);
}
static void print_advice(int show_hint, struct replay_opts *opts)
{
char *msg = getenv("GIT_CHERRY_PICK_HELP");
if (msg) {
fprintf(stderr, "%s\n", msg);
/*
* A conflict has occurred but the porcelain
* (typically rebase --interactive) wants to take care
* of the commit itself so remove CHERRY_PICK_HEAD
*/
memoize common git-path "constant" files One of the most common uses of git_path() is to pass a constant, like git_path("MERGE_MSG"). This has two drawbacks: 1. The return value is a static buffer, and the lifetime is dependent on other calls to git_path, etc. 2. There's no compile-time checking of the pathname. This is OK for a one-off (after all, we have to spell it correctly at least once), but many of these constant strings appear throughout the code. This patch introduces a series of functions to "memoize" these strings, which are essentially globals for the lifetime of the program. We compute the value once, take ownership of the buffer, and return the cached value for subsequent calls. cache.h provides a helper macro for defining these functions as one-liners, and defines a few common ones for global use. Using a macro is a little bit gross, but it does nicely document the purpose of the functions. If we need to touch them all later (e.g., because we learned how to change the git_dir variable at runtime, and need to invalidate all of the stored values), it will be much easier to have the complete list. Note that the shared-global functions have separate, manual declarations. We could do something clever with the macros (e.g., expand it to a declaration in some places, and a declaration _and_ a definition in path.c). But there aren't that many, and it's probably better to stay away from too-magical macros. Likewise, if we abandon the C preprocessor in favor of generating these with a script, we could get much fancier. E.g., normalizing "FOO/BAR-BAZ" into "git_path_foo_bar_baz". But the small amount of saved typing is probably not worth the resulting confusion to readers who want to grep for the function's definition. Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2015-08-10 12:38:57 +03:00
unlink(git_path_cherry_pick_head());
return;
}
if (show_hint) {
if (opts->no_commit)
advise(_("after resolving the conflicts, mark the corrected paths\n"
"with 'git add <paths>' or 'git rm <paths>'"));
else
advise(_("after resolving the conflicts, mark the corrected paths\n"
"with 'git add <paths>' or 'git rm <paths>'\n"
"and commit the result with 'git commit'"));
}
}
static int write_message(const void *buf, size_t len, const char *filename,
int append_eol)
{
static struct lock_file msg_file;
int msg_fd = hold_lock_file_for_update(&msg_file, filename, 0);
if (msg_fd < 0)
return error_errno(_("could not lock '%s'"), filename);
if (write_in_full(msg_fd, buf, len) < 0) {
rollback_lock_file(&msg_file);
return error_errno(_("could not write to '%s'"), filename);
}
if (append_eol && write(msg_fd, "\n", 1) < 0) {
rollback_lock_file(&msg_file);
return error_errno(_("could not write eol to '%s'"), filename);
}
if (commit_lock_file(&msg_file) < 0) {
rollback_lock_file(&msg_file);
return error(_("failed to finalize '%s'."), filename);
}
return 0;
}
/*
* Reads a file that was presumably written by a shell script, i.e. with an
* end-of-line marker that needs to be stripped.
*
* Note that only the last end-of-line marker is stripped, consistent with the
* behavior of "$(cat path)" in a shell script.
*
* Returns 1 if the file was read, 0 if it could not be read or does not exist.
*/
static int read_oneliner(struct strbuf *buf,
const char *path, int skip_if_empty)
{
int orig_len = buf->len;
if (!file_exists(path))
return 0;
if (strbuf_read_file(buf, path, 0) < 0) {
warning_errno(_("could not read '%s'"), path);
return 0;
}
if (buf->len > orig_len && buf->buf[buf->len - 1] == '\n') {
if (--buf->len > orig_len && buf->buf[buf->len - 1] == '\r')
--buf->len;
buf->buf[buf->len] = '\0';
}
if (skip_if_empty && buf->len == orig_len)
return 0;
return 1;
}
static struct tree *empty_tree(void)
{
return lookup_tree(EMPTY_TREE_SHA1_BIN);
}
static int error_dirty_index(struct replay_opts *opts)
{
if (read_cache_unmerged())
return error_resolve_conflict(_(action_name(opts)));
error(_("your local changes would be overwritten by %s."),
_(action_name(opts)));
if (advice_commit_before_merge)
advise(_("commit your changes or stash them to proceed."));
return -1;
}
static void update_abort_safety_file(void)
{
struct object_id head;
/* Do nothing on a single-pick */
if (!file_exists(git_path_seq_dir()))
return;
if (!get_oid("HEAD", &head))
write_file(git_path_abort_safety_file(), "%s", oid_to_hex(&head));
else
write_file(git_path_abort_safety_file(), "%s", "");
}
static int fast_forward_to(const unsigned char *to, const unsigned char *from,
int unborn, struct replay_opts *opts)
{
struct ref_transaction *transaction;
struct strbuf sb = STRBUF_INIT;
struct strbuf err = STRBUF_INIT;
read_cache();
if (checkout_fast_forward(from, to, 1))
return -1; /* the callee should have complained already */
strbuf_addf(&sb, _("%s: fast-forward"), _(action_name(opts)));
transaction = ref_transaction_begin(&err);
if (!transaction ||
ref_transaction_update(transaction, "HEAD",
to, unborn ? null_sha1 : from,
0, sb.buf, &err) ||
ref_transaction_commit(transaction, &err)) {
ref_transaction_free(transaction);
error("%s", err.buf);
strbuf_release(&sb);
strbuf_release(&err);
return -1;
}
strbuf_release(&sb);
strbuf_release(&err);
ref_transaction_free(transaction);
update_abort_safety_file();
return 0;
}
void append_conflicts_hint(struct strbuf *msgbuf)
{
int i;
strbuf_addch(msgbuf, '\n');
strbuf_commented_addf(msgbuf, "Conflicts:\n");
for (i = 0; i < active_nr;) {
const struct cache_entry *ce = active_cache[i++];
if (ce_stage(ce)) {
strbuf_commented_addf(msgbuf, "\t%s\n", ce->name);
while (i < active_nr && !strcmp(ce->name,
active_cache[i]->name))
i++;
}
}
}
static int do_recursive_merge(struct commit *base, struct commit *next,
const char *base_label, const char *next_label,
unsigned char *head, struct strbuf *msgbuf,
struct replay_opts *opts)
{
struct merge_options o;
struct tree *result, *next_tree, *base_tree, *head_tree;
int clean;
char **xopt;
static struct lock_file index_lock;
hold_locked_index(): align error handling with hold_lockfile_for_update() Callers of the hold_locked_index() function pass 0 when they want to prepare to write a new version of the index file without wishing to die or emit an error message when the request fails (e.g. somebody else already held the lock), and pass 1 when they want the call to die upon failure. This option is called LOCK_DIE_ON_ERROR by the underlying lockfile API, and the hold_locked_index() function translates the paramter to LOCK_DIE_ON_ERROR when calling the hold_lock_file_for_update(). Replace these hardcoded '1' with LOCK_DIE_ON_ERROR and stop translating. Callers other than the ones that are replaced with this change pass '0' to the function; no behaviour change is intended with this patch. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> --- Among the callers of hold_locked_index() that passes 0: - diff.c::refresh_index_quietly() at the end of "git diff" is an opportunistic update; it leaks the lockfile structure but it is just before the program exits and nobody should care. - builtin/describe.c::cmd_describe(), builtin/commit.c::cmd_status(), sequencer.c::read_and_refresh_cache() are all opportunistic updates and they are OK. - builtin/update-index.c::cmd_update_index() takes a lock upfront but we may end up not needing to update the index (i.e. the entries may be fully up-to-date), in which case we do not need to issue an error upon failure to acquire the lock. We do diagnose and die if we indeed need to update, so it is OK. - wt-status.c::require_clean_work_tree() IS BUGGY. It asks silence, does not check the returned value. Compare with callsites like cmd_describe() and cmd_status() to notice that it is wrong to call update_index_if_able() unconditionally.
2016-12-07 21:33:54 +03:00
hold_locked_index(&index_lock, LOCK_DIE_ON_ERROR);
read_cache();
init_merge_options(&o);
o.ancestor = base ? base_label : "(empty tree)";
o.branch1 = "HEAD";
o.branch2 = next ? next_label : "(empty tree)";
head_tree = parse_tree_indirect(head);
next_tree = next ? next->tree : empty_tree();
base_tree = base ? base->tree : empty_tree();
for (xopt = opts->xopts; xopt != opts->xopts + opts->xopts_nr; xopt++)
parse_merge_opt(&o, *xopt);
clean = merge_trees(&o,
head_tree,
next_tree, base_tree, &result);
strbuf_release(&o.obuf);
prepare the builtins for a libified merge_recursive() Previously, callers of merge_trees() or merge_recursive() expected that code to die() with an error message. This used to be okay because we called those commands from scripts, and had a chance to print out a message in case the command failed fatally (read: with exit code 128). As scripting incurs its own set of problems (portability, speed, idiosyncrasies of different shells, limited data structures leading to inefficient code), we are converting more and more of these scripts into builtins, using library functions directly. We already tried to use merge_recursive() directly in the builtin git-am, for example. Unfortunately, we had to roll it back temporarily because some of the code in merge-recursive.c still deemed it okay to call die(), when the builtin am code really wanted to print out a useful advice after the merge failed fatally. In the next commits, we want to fix that. The code touched by this commit expected merge_trees() to die() with some useful message when there is an error condition, but merge_trees() is going to be improved by converting all die() calls to return error() instead (i.e. return value -1 after printing out the message as before), so that the caller can react more flexibly. This is a step to prepare for the version of merge_trees() that no longer dies, even if we just imitate the previous behavior by calling exit(128): this is what callers of e.g. `git merge` have come to expect. Note that the callers of the sequencer (revert and cherry-pick) already fail fast even for the return value -1; The only difference is that they now get a chance to say "<command> failed". A caller of merge_trees() might want handle error messages themselves (or even suppress them). As this patch is already complex enough, we leave that change for a later patch. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-07-26 19:06:02 +03:00
if (clean < 0)
return clean;
if (active_cache_changed &&
write_locked_index(&the_index, &index_lock, COMMIT_LOCK))
/* TRANSLATORS: %s will be "revert", "cherry-pick" or
* "rebase -i".
*/
return error(_("%s: Unable to write new index file"),
_(action_name(opts)));
rollback_lock_file(&index_lock);
if (opts->signoff)
append_signoff(msgbuf, 0, 0);
if (!clean)
append_conflicts_hint(msgbuf);
return !clean;
}
static int is_index_unchanged(void)
{
unsigned char head_sha1[20];
struct commit *head_commit;
if (!resolve_ref_unsafe("HEAD", RESOLVE_REF_READING, head_sha1, NULL))
return error(_("could not resolve HEAD commit\n"));
head_commit = lookup_commit(head_sha1);
/*
* If head_commit is NULL, check_commit, called from
* lookup_commit, would have indicated that head_commit is not
* a commit object already. parse_commit() will return failure
* without further complaints in such a case. Otherwise, if
* the commit is invalid, parse_commit() will complain. So
* there is nothing for us to say here. Just return failure.
*/
if (parse_commit(head_commit))
return -1;
if (!active_cache_tree)
active_cache_tree = cache_tree();
if (!cache_tree_fully_valid(active_cache_tree))
if (cache_tree_update(&the_index, 0))
return error(_("unable to update cache tree\n"));
return !hashcmp(active_cache_tree->sha1, head_commit->tree->object.oid.hash);
}
/*
* Read the author-script file into an environment block, ready for use in
* run_command(), that can be free()d afterwards.
*/
static char **read_author_script(void)
{
struct strbuf script = STRBUF_INIT;
int i, count = 0;
char *p, *p2, **env;
size_t env_size;
if (strbuf_read_file(&script, rebase_path_author_script(), 256) <= 0)
return NULL;
for (p = script.buf; *p; p++)
if (skip_prefix(p, "'\\\\''", (const char **)&p2))
strbuf_splice(&script, p - script.buf, p2 - p, "'", 1);
else if (*p == '\'')
strbuf_splice(&script, p-- - script.buf, 1, "", 0);
else if (*p == '\n') {
*p = '\0';
count++;
}
env_size = (count + 1) * sizeof(*env);
strbuf_grow(&script, env_size);
memmove(script.buf + env_size, script.buf, script.len);
p = script.buf + env_size;
env = (char **)strbuf_detach(&script, NULL);
for (i = 0; i < count; i++) {
env[i] = p;
p += strlen(p) + 1;
}
env[count] = NULL;
return env;
}
static const char staged_changes_advice[] =
N_("you have staged changes in your working tree\n"
"If these changes are meant to be squashed into the previous commit, run:\n"
"\n"
" git commit --amend %s\n"
"\n"
"If they are meant to go into a new commit, run:\n"
"\n"
" git commit %s\n"
"\n"
"In both cases, once you're done, continue with:\n"
"\n"
" git rebase --continue\n");
/*
* If we are cherry-pick, and if the merge did not result in
* hand-editing, we will hit this commit and inherit the original
* author date and name.
*
* If we are revert, or if our cherry-pick results in a hand merge,
* we had better say that the current user is responsible for that.
*
* An exception is when run_git_commit() is called during an
* interactive rebase: in that case, we will want to retain the
* author metadata.
*/
static int run_git_commit(const char *defmsg, struct replay_opts *opts,
int allow_empty, int edit, int amend,
int cleanup_commit_message)
{
char **env = NULL;
struct argv_array array;
int rc;
const char *value;
if (is_rebase_i(opts)) {
env = read_author_script();
if (!env) {
const char *gpg_opt = gpg_sign_opt_quoted(opts);
return error(_(staged_changes_advice),
gpg_opt, gpg_opt);
}
}
argv_array_init(&array);
argv_array_push(&array, "commit");
argv_array_push(&array, "-n");
if (amend)
argv_array_push(&array, "--amend");
if (opts->gpg_sign)
argv_array_pushf(&array, "-S%s", opts->gpg_sign);
if (opts->signoff)
argv_array_push(&array, "-s");
if (defmsg)
argv_array_pushl(&array, "-F", defmsg, NULL);
if (cleanup_commit_message)
argv_array_push(&array, "--cleanup=strip");
if (edit)
argv_array_push(&array, "-e");
else if (!cleanup_commit_message &&
!opts->signoff && !opts->record_origin &&
git_config_get_value("commit.cleanup", &value))
argv_array_push(&array, "--cleanup=verbatim");
if (allow_empty)
argv_array_push(&array, "--allow-empty");
if (opts->allow_empty_message)
argv_array_push(&array, "--allow-empty-message");
rc = run_command_v_opt_cd_env(array.argv, RUN_GIT_CMD, NULL,
(const char *const *)env);
argv_array_clear(&array);
free(env);
return rc;
}
static int is_original_commit_empty(struct commit *commit)
{
const unsigned char *ptree_sha1;
if (parse_commit(commit))
return error(_("could not parse commit %s\n"),
oid_to_hex(&commit->object.oid));
if (commit->parents) {
struct commit *parent = commit->parents->item;
if (parse_commit(parent))
return error(_("could not parse parent commit %s\n"),
oid_to_hex(&parent->object.oid));
ptree_sha1 = parent->tree->object.oid.hash;
} else {
ptree_sha1 = EMPTY_TREE_SHA1_BIN; /* commit is root */
}
return !hashcmp(ptree_sha1, commit->tree->object.oid.hash);
}
/*
* Do we run "git commit" with "--allow-empty"?
*/
static int allow_empty(struct replay_opts *opts, struct commit *commit)
{
int index_unchanged, empty_commit;
/*
* Three cases:
*
* (1) we do not allow empty at all and error out.
*
* (2) we allow ones that were initially empty, but
* forbid the ones that become empty;
*
* (3) we allow both.
*/
if (!opts->allow_empty)
return 0; /* let "git commit" barf as necessary */
index_unchanged = is_index_unchanged();
if (index_unchanged < 0)
return index_unchanged;
if (!index_unchanged)
return 0; /* we do not have to say --allow-empty */
if (opts->keep_redundant_commits)
return 1;
empty_commit = is_original_commit_empty(commit);
if (empty_commit < 0)
return empty_commit;
if (!empty_commit)
return 0;
else
return 1;
}
/*
* Note that ordering matters in this enum. Not only must it match the mapping
* below, it is also divided into several sections that matter. When adding
* new commands, make sure you add it in the right section.
*/
sequencer: completely revamp the "todo" script parsing When we came up with the "sequencer" idea, we really wanted to have kind of a plumbing equivalent of the interactive rebase. Hence the choice of words: the "todo" script, a "pick", etc. However, when it came time to implement the entire shebang, somehow this idea got lost and the sequencer was used as working horse for cherry-pick and revert instead. So as not to interfere with the interactive rebase, it even uses a separate directory to store its state. Furthermore, it also is stupidly strict about the "todo" script it accepts: while it parses commands in a way that was *designed* to be similar to the interactive rebase, it then goes on to *error out* if the commands disagree with the overall action (cherry-pick or revert). Finally, the sequencer code chose to deviate from the interactive rebase code insofar that when it comes to writing the file with the remaining commands, it *reformats* the "todo" script instead of just writing the part of the parsed script that were not yet processed. This is not only unnecessary churn, but might well lose information that is valuable to the user (i.e. comments after the commands). Let's just bite the bullet and rewrite the entire parser; the code now becomes not only more elegant: it allows us to go on and teach the sequencer how to parse *true* "todo" scripts as used by the interactive rebase itself. In a way, the sequencer is about to grow up to do its older brother's job. Better. In particular, we choose to maintain the list of commands in an array instead of a linked list: this is flexible enough to allow us later on to even implement rebase -i's reordering of fixup!/squash! commits very easily (and with a very nice speed bonus, at least on Windows). While at it, do not stop at the first problem, but list *all* of the problems. This will help the user when the sequencer will do `rebase -i`'s work by allowing to address all issues in one go rather than going back and forth until the todo list is valid. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-10-21 15:24:41 +03:00
enum todo_command {
/* commands that handle commits */
sequencer: completely revamp the "todo" script parsing When we came up with the "sequencer" idea, we really wanted to have kind of a plumbing equivalent of the interactive rebase. Hence the choice of words: the "todo" script, a "pick", etc. However, when it came time to implement the entire shebang, somehow this idea got lost and the sequencer was used as working horse for cherry-pick and revert instead. So as not to interfere with the interactive rebase, it even uses a separate directory to store its state. Furthermore, it also is stupidly strict about the "todo" script it accepts: while it parses commands in a way that was *designed* to be similar to the interactive rebase, it then goes on to *error out* if the commands disagree with the overall action (cherry-pick or revert). Finally, the sequencer code chose to deviate from the interactive rebase code insofar that when it comes to writing the file with the remaining commands, it *reformats* the "todo" script instead of just writing the part of the parsed script that were not yet processed. This is not only unnecessary churn, but might well lose information that is valuable to the user (i.e. comments after the commands). Let's just bite the bullet and rewrite the entire parser; the code now becomes not only more elegant: it allows us to go on and teach the sequencer how to parse *true* "todo" scripts as used by the interactive rebase itself. In a way, the sequencer is about to grow up to do its older brother's job. Better. In particular, we choose to maintain the list of commands in an array instead of a linked list: this is flexible enough to allow us later on to even implement rebase -i's reordering of fixup!/squash! commits very easily (and with a very nice speed bonus, at least on Windows). While at it, do not stop at the first problem, but list *all* of the problems. This will help the user when the sequencer will do `rebase -i`'s work by allowing to address all issues in one go rather than going back and forth until the todo list is valid. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-10-21 15:24:41 +03:00
TODO_PICK = 0,
TODO_REVERT,
TODO_EDIT,
/* commands that do nothing but are counted for reporting progress */
TODO_NOOP
sequencer: completely revamp the "todo" script parsing When we came up with the "sequencer" idea, we really wanted to have kind of a plumbing equivalent of the interactive rebase. Hence the choice of words: the "todo" script, a "pick", etc. However, when it came time to implement the entire shebang, somehow this idea got lost and the sequencer was used as working horse for cherry-pick and revert instead. So as not to interfere with the interactive rebase, it even uses a separate directory to store its state. Furthermore, it also is stupidly strict about the "todo" script it accepts: while it parses commands in a way that was *designed* to be similar to the interactive rebase, it then goes on to *error out* if the commands disagree with the overall action (cherry-pick or revert). Finally, the sequencer code chose to deviate from the interactive rebase code insofar that when it comes to writing the file with the remaining commands, it *reformats* the "todo" script instead of just writing the part of the parsed script that were not yet processed. This is not only unnecessary churn, but might well lose information that is valuable to the user (i.e. comments after the commands). Let's just bite the bullet and rewrite the entire parser; the code now becomes not only more elegant: it allows us to go on and teach the sequencer how to parse *true* "todo" scripts as used by the interactive rebase itself. In a way, the sequencer is about to grow up to do its older brother's job. Better. In particular, we choose to maintain the list of commands in an array instead of a linked list: this is flexible enough to allow us later on to even implement rebase -i's reordering of fixup!/squash! commits very easily (and with a very nice speed bonus, at least on Windows). While at it, do not stop at the first problem, but list *all* of the problems. This will help the user when the sequencer will do `rebase -i`'s work by allowing to address all issues in one go rather than going back and forth until the todo list is valid. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-10-21 15:24:41 +03:00
};
static const char *todo_command_strings[] = {
"pick",
"revert",
"edit",
"noop"
sequencer: completely revamp the "todo" script parsing When we came up with the "sequencer" idea, we really wanted to have kind of a plumbing equivalent of the interactive rebase. Hence the choice of words: the "todo" script, a "pick", etc. However, when it came time to implement the entire shebang, somehow this idea got lost and the sequencer was used as working horse for cherry-pick and revert instead. So as not to interfere with the interactive rebase, it even uses a separate directory to store its state. Furthermore, it also is stupidly strict about the "todo" script it accepts: while it parses commands in a way that was *designed* to be similar to the interactive rebase, it then goes on to *error out* if the commands disagree with the overall action (cherry-pick or revert). Finally, the sequencer code chose to deviate from the interactive rebase code insofar that when it comes to writing the file with the remaining commands, it *reformats* the "todo" script instead of just writing the part of the parsed script that were not yet processed. This is not only unnecessary churn, but might well lose information that is valuable to the user (i.e. comments after the commands). Let's just bite the bullet and rewrite the entire parser; the code now becomes not only more elegant: it allows us to go on and teach the sequencer how to parse *true* "todo" scripts as used by the interactive rebase itself. In a way, the sequencer is about to grow up to do its older brother's job. Better. In particular, we choose to maintain the list of commands in an array instead of a linked list: this is flexible enough to allow us later on to even implement rebase -i's reordering of fixup!/squash! commits very easily (and with a very nice speed bonus, at least on Windows). While at it, do not stop at the first problem, but list *all* of the problems. This will help the user when the sequencer will do `rebase -i`'s work by allowing to address all issues in one go rather than going back and forth until the todo list is valid. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-10-21 15:24:41 +03:00
};
static const char *command_to_string(const enum todo_command command)
{
if ((size_t)command < ARRAY_SIZE(todo_command_strings))
sequencer: completely revamp the "todo" script parsing When we came up with the "sequencer" idea, we really wanted to have kind of a plumbing equivalent of the interactive rebase. Hence the choice of words: the "todo" script, a "pick", etc. However, when it came time to implement the entire shebang, somehow this idea got lost and the sequencer was used as working horse for cherry-pick and revert instead. So as not to interfere with the interactive rebase, it even uses a separate directory to store its state. Furthermore, it also is stupidly strict about the "todo" script it accepts: while it parses commands in a way that was *designed* to be similar to the interactive rebase, it then goes on to *error out* if the commands disagree with the overall action (cherry-pick or revert). Finally, the sequencer code chose to deviate from the interactive rebase code insofar that when it comes to writing the file with the remaining commands, it *reformats* the "todo" script instead of just writing the part of the parsed script that were not yet processed. This is not only unnecessary churn, but might well lose information that is valuable to the user (i.e. comments after the commands). Let's just bite the bullet and rewrite the entire parser; the code now becomes not only more elegant: it allows us to go on and teach the sequencer how to parse *true* "todo" scripts as used by the interactive rebase itself. In a way, the sequencer is about to grow up to do its older brother's job. Better. In particular, we choose to maintain the list of commands in an array instead of a linked list: this is flexible enough to allow us later on to even implement rebase -i's reordering of fixup!/squash! commits very easily (and with a very nice speed bonus, at least on Windows). While at it, do not stop at the first problem, but list *all* of the problems. This will help the user when the sequencer will do `rebase -i`'s work by allowing to address all issues in one go rather than going back and forth until the todo list is valid. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-10-21 15:24:41 +03:00
return todo_command_strings[command];
die("Unknown command: %d", command);
}
static int is_noop(const enum todo_command command)
{
return TODO_NOOP <= (size_t)command;
}
sequencer: completely revamp the "todo" script parsing When we came up with the "sequencer" idea, we really wanted to have kind of a plumbing equivalent of the interactive rebase. Hence the choice of words: the "todo" script, a "pick", etc. However, when it came time to implement the entire shebang, somehow this idea got lost and the sequencer was used as working horse for cherry-pick and revert instead. So as not to interfere with the interactive rebase, it even uses a separate directory to store its state. Furthermore, it also is stupidly strict about the "todo" script it accepts: while it parses commands in a way that was *designed* to be similar to the interactive rebase, it then goes on to *error out* if the commands disagree with the overall action (cherry-pick or revert). Finally, the sequencer code chose to deviate from the interactive rebase code insofar that when it comes to writing the file with the remaining commands, it *reformats* the "todo" script instead of just writing the part of the parsed script that were not yet processed. This is not only unnecessary churn, but might well lose information that is valuable to the user (i.e. comments after the commands). Let's just bite the bullet and rewrite the entire parser; the code now becomes not only more elegant: it allows us to go on and teach the sequencer how to parse *true* "todo" scripts as used by the interactive rebase itself. In a way, the sequencer is about to grow up to do its older brother's job. Better. In particular, we choose to maintain the list of commands in an array instead of a linked list: this is flexible enough to allow us later on to even implement rebase -i's reordering of fixup!/squash! commits very easily (and with a very nice speed bonus, at least on Windows). While at it, do not stop at the first problem, but list *all* of the problems. This will help the user when the sequencer will do `rebase -i`'s work by allowing to address all issues in one go rather than going back and forth until the todo list is valid. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-10-21 15:24:41 +03:00
static int do_pick_commit(enum todo_command command, struct commit *commit,
struct replay_opts *opts)
{
unsigned char head[20];
struct commit *base, *next, *parent;
const char *base_label, *next_label;
struct commit_message msg = { NULL, NULL, NULL, NULL };
struct strbuf msgbuf = STRBUF_INIT;
int res, unborn = 0, allow;
if (opts->no_commit) {
/*
* We do not intend to commit immediately. We just want to
* merge the differences in, so let's compute the tree
* that represents the "current" state for merge-recursive
* to work on.
*/
if (write_cache_as_tree(head, 0, NULL))
return error(_("your index file is unmerged."));
} else {
unborn = get_sha1("HEAD", head);
if (unborn)
hashcpy(head, EMPTY_TREE_SHA1_BIN);
if (index_differs_from(unborn ? EMPTY_TREE_SHA1_HEX : "HEAD", 0, 0))
return error_dirty_index(opts);
}
discard_cache();
if (!commit->parents)
parent = NULL;
else if (commit->parents->next) {
/* Reverting or cherry-picking a merge commit */
int cnt;
struct commit_list *p;
if (!opts->mainline)
return error(_("commit %s is a merge but no -m option was given."),
oid_to_hex(&commit->object.oid));
for (cnt = 1, p = commit->parents;
cnt != opts->mainline && p;
cnt++)
p = p->next;
if (cnt != opts->mainline || !p)
return error(_("commit %s does not have parent %d"),
oid_to_hex(&commit->object.oid), opts->mainline);
parent = p->item;
} else if (0 < opts->mainline)
return error(_("mainline was specified but commit %s is not a merge."),
oid_to_hex(&commit->object.oid));
else
parent = commit->parents->item;
if (opts->allow_ff &&
((parent && !hashcmp(parent->object.oid.hash, head)) ||
(!parent && unborn)))
return fast_forward_to(commit->object.oid.hash, head, unborn, opts);
if (parent && parse_commit(parent) < 0)
sequencer: completely revamp the "todo" script parsing When we came up with the "sequencer" idea, we really wanted to have kind of a plumbing equivalent of the interactive rebase. Hence the choice of words: the "todo" script, a "pick", etc. However, when it came time to implement the entire shebang, somehow this idea got lost and the sequencer was used as working horse for cherry-pick and revert instead. So as not to interfere with the interactive rebase, it even uses a separate directory to store its state. Furthermore, it also is stupidly strict about the "todo" script it accepts: while it parses commands in a way that was *designed* to be similar to the interactive rebase, it then goes on to *error out* if the commands disagree with the overall action (cherry-pick or revert). Finally, the sequencer code chose to deviate from the interactive rebase code insofar that when it comes to writing the file with the remaining commands, it *reformats* the "todo" script instead of just writing the part of the parsed script that were not yet processed. This is not only unnecessary churn, but might well lose information that is valuable to the user (i.e. comments after the commands). Let's just bite the bullet and rewrite the entire parser; the code now becomes not only more elegant: it allows us to go on and teach the sequencer how to parse *true* "todo" scripts as used by the interactive rebase itself. In a way, the sequencer is about to grow up to do its older brother's job. Better. In particular, we choose to maintain the list of commands in an array instead of a linked list: this is flexible enough to allow us later on to even implement rebase -i's reordering of fixup!/squash! commits very easily (and with a very nice speed bonus, at least on Windows). While at it, do not stop at the first problem, but list *all* of the problems. This will help the user when the sequencer will do `rebase -i`'s work by allowing to address all issues in one go rather than going back and forth until the todo list is valid. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-10-21 15:24:41 +03:00
/* TRANSLATORS: The first %s will be a "todo" command like
"revert" or "pick", the second %s a SHA1. */
return error(_("%s: cannot parse parent commit %s"),
sequencer: completely revamp the "todo" script parsing When we came up with the "sequencer" idea, we really wanted to have kind of a plumbing equivalent of the interactive rebase. Hence the choice of words: the "todo" script, a "pick", etc. However, when it came time to implement the entire shebang, somehow this idea got lost and the sequencer was used as working horse for cherry-pick and revert instead. So as not to interfere with the interactive rebase, it even uses a separate directory to store its state. Furthermore, it also is stupidly strict about the "todo" script it accepts: while it parses commands in a way that was *designed* to be similar to the interactive rebase, it then goes on to *error out* if the commands disagree with the overall action (cherry-pick or revert). Finally, the sequencer code chose to deviate from the interactive rebase code insofar that when it comes to writing the file with the remaining commands, it *reformats* the "todo" script instead of just writing the part of the parsed script that were not yet processed. This is not only unnecessary churn, but might well lose information that is valuable to the user (i.e. comments after the commands). Let's just bite the bullet and rewrite the entire parser; the code now becomes not only more elegant: it allows us to go on and teach the sequencer how to parse *true* "todo" scripts as used by the interactive rebase itself. In a way, the sequencer is about to grow up to do its older brother's job. Better. In particular, we choose to maintain the list of commands in an array instead of a linked list: this is flexible enough to allow us later on to even implement rebase -i's reordering of fixup!/squash! commits very easily (and with a very nice speed bonus, at least on Windows). While at it, do not stop at the first problem, but list *all* of the problems. This will help the user when the sequencer will do `rebase -i`'s work by allowing to address all issues in one go rather than going back and forth until the todo list is valid. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-10-21 15:24:41 +03:00
command_to_string(command),
oid_to_hex(&parent->object.oid));
if (get_message(commit, &msg) != 0)
return error(_("cannot get commit message for %s"),
oid_to_hex(&commit->object.oid));
/*
* "commit" is an existing commit. We would want to apply
* the difference it introduces since its first parent "prev"
* on top of the current HEAD if we are cherry-pick. Or the
* reverse of it if we are revert.
*/
sequencer: completely revamp the "todo" script parsing When we came up with the "sequencer" idea, we really wanted to have kind of a plumbing equivalent of the interactive rebase. Hence the choice of words: the "todo" script, a "pick", etc. However, when it came time to implement the entire shebang, somehow this idea got lost and the sequencer was used as working horse for cherry-pick and revert instead. So as not to interfere with the interactive rebase, it even uses a separate directory to store its state. Furthermore, it also is stupidly strict about the "todo" script it accepts: while it parses commands in a way that was *designed* to be similar to the interactive rebase, it then goes on to *error out* if the commands disagree with the overall action (cherry-pick or revert). Finally, the sequencer code chose to deviate from the interactive rebase code insofar that when it comes to writing the file with the remaining commands, it *reformats* the "todo" script instead of just writing the part of the parsed script that were not yet processed. This is not only unnecessary churn, but might well lose information that is valuable to the user (i.e. comments after the commands). Let's just bite the bullet and rewrite the entire parser; the code now becomes not only more elegant: it allows us to go on and teach the sequencer how to parse *true* "todo" scripts as used by the interactive rebase itself. In a way, the sequencer is about to grow up to do its older brother's job. Better. In particular, we choose to maintain the list of commands in an array instead of a linked list: this is flexible enough to allow us later on to even implement rebase -i's reordering of fixup!/squash! commits very easily (and with a very nice speed bonus, at least on Windows). While at it, do not stop at the first problem, but list *all* of the problems. This will help the user when the sequencer will do `rebase -i`'s work by allowing to address all issues in one go rather than going back and forth until the todo list is valid. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-10-21 15:24:41 +03:00
if (command == TODO_REVERT) {
base = commit;
base_label = msg.label;
next = parent;
next_label = msg.parent_label;
strbuf_addstr(&msgbuf, "Revert \"");
strbuf_addstr(&msgbuf, msg.subject);
strbuf_addstr(&msgbuf, "\"\n\nThis reverts commit ");
strbuf_addstr(&msgbuf, oid_to_hex(&commit->object.oid));
if (commit->parents && commit->parents->next) {
strbuf_addstr(&msgbuf, ", reversing\nchanges made to ");
strbuf_addstr(&msgbuf, oid_to_hex(&parent->object.oid));
}
strbuf_addstr(&msgbuf, ".\n");
} else {
const char *p;
base = parent;
base_label = msg.parent_label;
next = commit;
next_label = msg.label;
/* Append the commit log message to msgbuf. */
if (find_commit_subject(msg.message, &p))
strbuf_addstr(&msgbuf, p);
if (opts->record_origin) {
if (!has_conforming_footer(&msgbuf, NULL, 0))
strbuf_addch(&msgbuf, '\n');
strbuf_addstr(&msgbuf, cherry_picked_prefix);
strbuf_addstr(&msgbuf, oid_to_hex(&commit->object.oid));
strbuf_addstr(&msgbuf, ")\n");
}
}
sequencer: completely revamp the "todo" script parsing When we came up with the "sequencer" idea, we really wanted to have kind of a plumbing equivalent of the interactive rebase. Hence the choice of words: the "todo" script, a "pick", etc. However, when it came time to implement the entire shebang, somehow this idea got lost and the sequencer was used as working horse for cherry-pick and revert instead. So as not to interfere with the interactive rebase, it even uses a separate directory to store its state. Furthermore, it also is stupidly strict about the "todo" script it accepts: while it parses commands in a way that was *designed* to be similar to the interactive rebase, it then goes on to *error out* if the commands disagree with the overall action (cherry-pick or revert). Finally, the sequencer code chose to deviate from the interactive rebase code insofar that when it comes to writing the file with the remaining commands, it *reformats* the "todo" script instead of just writing the part of the parsed script that were not yet processed. This is not only unnecessary churn, but might well lose information that is valuable to the user (i.e. comments after the commands). Let's just bite the bullet and rewrite the entire parser; the code now becomes not only more elegant: it allows us to go on and teach the sequencer how to parse *true* "todo" scripts as used by the interactive rebase itself. In a way, the sequencer is about to grow up to do its older brother's job. Better. In particular, we choose to maintain the list of commands in an array instead of a linked list: this is flexible enough to allow us later on to even implement rebase -i's reordering of fixup!/squash! commits very easily (and with a very nice speed bonus, at least on Windows). While at it, do not stop at the first problem, but list *all* of the problems. This will help the user when the sequencer will do `rebase -i`'s work by allowing to address all issues in one go rather than going back and forth until the todo list is valid. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-10-21 15:24:41 +03:00
if (!opts->strategy || !strcmp(opts->strategy, "recursive") || command == TODO_REVERT) {
res = do_recursive_merge(base, next, base_label, next_label,
head, &msgbuf, opts);
prepare the builtins for a libified merge_recursive() Previously, callers of merge_trees() or merge_recursive() expected that code to die() with an error message. This used to be okay because we called those commands from scripts, and had a chance to print out a message in case the command failed fatally (read: with exit code 128). As scripting incurs its own set of problems (portability, speed, idiosyncrasies of different shells, limited data structures leading to inefficient code), we are converting more and more of these scripts into builtins, using library functions directly. We already tried to use merge_recursive() directly in the builtin git-am, for example. Unfortunately, we had to roll it back temporarily because some of the code in merge-recursive.c still deemed it okay to call die(), when the builtin am code really wanted to print out a useful advice after the merge failed fatally. In the next commits, we want to fix that. The code touched by this commit expected merge_trees() to die() with some useful message when there is an error condition, but merge_trees() is going to be improved by converting all die() calls to return error() instead (i.e. return value -1 after printing out the message as before), so that the caller can react more flexibly. This is a step to prepare for the version of merge_trees() that no longer dies, even if we just imitate the previous behavior by calling exit(128): this is what callers of e.g. `git merge` have come to expect. Note that the callers of the sequencer (revert and cherry-pick) already fail fast even for the return value -1; The only difference is that they now get a chance to say "<command> failed". A caller of merge_trees() might want handle error messages themselves (or even suppress them). As this patch is already complex enough, we leave that change for a later patch. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-07-26 19:06:02 +03:00
if (res < 0)
return res;
res |= write_message(msgbuf.buf, msgbuf.len,
git_path_merge_msg(), 0);
} else {
struct commit_list *common = NULL;
struct commit_list *remotes = NULL;
res = write_message(msgbuf.buf, msgbuf.len,
git_path_merge_msg(), 0);
commit_list_insert(base, &common);
commit_list_insert(next, &remotes);
res |= try_merge_command(opts->strategy,
opts->xopts_nr, (const char **)opts->xopts,
common, sha1_to_hex(head), remotes);
free_commit_list(common);
free_commit_list(remotes);
}
strbuf_release(&msgbuf);
/*
* If the merge was clean or if it failed due to conflict, we write
* CHERRY_PICK_HEAD for the subsequent invocation of commit to use.
* However, if the merge did not even start, then we don't want to
* write it at all.
*/
sequencer: completely revamp the "todo" script parsing When we came up with the "sequencer" idea, we really wanted to have kind of a plumbing equivalent of the interactive rebase. Hence the choice of words: the "todo" script, a "pick", etc. However, when it came time to implement the entire shebang, somehow this idea got lost and the sequencer was used as working horse for cherry-pick and revert instead. So as not to interfere with the interactive rebase, it even uses a separate directory to store its state. Furthermore, it also is stupidly strict about the "todo" script it accepts: while it parses commands in a way that was *designed* to be similar to the interactive rebase, it then goes on to *error out* if the commands disagree with the overall action (cherry-pick or revert). Finally, the sequencer code chose to deviate from the interactive rebase code insofar that when it comes to writing the file with the remaining commands, it *reformats* the "todo" script instead of just writing the part of the parsed script that were not yet processed. This is not only unnecessary churn, but might well lose information that is valuable to the user (i.e. comments after the commands). Let's just bite the bullet and rewrite the entire parser; the code now becomes not only more elegant: it allows us to go on and teach the sequencer how to parse *true* "todo" scripts as used by the interactive rebase itself. In a way, the sequencer is about to grow up to do its older brother's job. Better. In particular, we choose to maintain the list of commands in an array instead of a linked list: this is flexible enough to allow us later on to even implement rebase -i's reordering of fixup!/squash! commits very easily (and with a very nice speed bonus, at least on Windows). While at it, do not stop at the first problem, but list *all* of the problems. This will help the user when the sequencer will do `rebase -i`'s work by allowing to address all issues in one go rather than going back and forth until the todo list is valid. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-10-21 15:24:41 +03:00
if (command == TODO_PICK && !opts->no_commit && (res == 0 || res == 1) &&
update_ref(NULL, "CHERRY_PICK_HEAD", commit->object.oid.hash, NULL,
REF_NODEREF, UPDATE_REFS_MSG_ON_ERR))
res = -1;
sequencer: completely revamp the "todo" script parsing When we came up with the "sequencer" idea, we really wanted to have kind of a plumbing equivalent of the interactive rebase. Hence the choice of words: the "todo" script, a "pick", etc. However, when it came time to implement the entire shebang, somehow this idea got lost and the sequencer was used as working horse for cherry-pick and revert instead. So as not to interfere with the interactive rebase, it even uses a separate directory to store its state. Furthermore, it also is stupidly strict about the "todo" script it accepts: while it parses commands in a way that was *designed* to be similar to the interactive rebase, it then goes on to *error out* if the commands disagree with the overall action (cherry-pick or revert). Finally, the sequencer code chose to deviate from the interactive rebase code insofar that when it comes to writing the file with the remaining commands, it *reformats* the "todo" script instead of just writing the part of the parsed script that were not yet processed. This is not only unnecessary churn, but might well lose information that is valuable to the user (i.e. comments after the commands). Let's just bite the bullet and rewrite the entire parser; the code now becomes not only more elegant: it allows us to go on and teach the sequencer how to parse *true* "todo" scripts as used by the interactive rebase itself. In a way, the sequencer is about to grow up to do its older brother's job. Better. In particular, we choose to maintain the list of commands in an array instead of a linked list: this is flexible enough to allow us later on to even implement rebase -i's reordering of fixup!/squash! commits very easily (and with a very nice speed bonus, at least on Windows). While at it, do not stop at the first problem, but list *all* of the problems. This will help the user when the sequencer will do `rebase -i`'s work by allowing to address all issues in one go rather than going back and forth until the todo list is valid. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-10-21 15:24:41 +03:00
if (command == TODO_REVERT && ((opts->no_commit && res == 0) || res == 1) &&
update_ref(NULL, "REVERT_HEAD", commit->object.oid.hash, NULL,
REF_NODEREF, UPDATE_REFS_MSG_ON_ERR))
res = -1;
if (res) {
sequencer: completely revamp the "todo" script parsing When we came up with the "sequencer" idea, we really wanted to have kind of a plumbing equivalent of the interactive rebase. Hence the choice of words: the "todo" script, a "pick", etc. However, when it came time to implement the entire shebang, somehow this idea got lost and the sequencer was used as working horse for cherry-pick and revert instead. So as not to interfere with the interactive rebase, it even uses a separate directory to store its state. Furthermore, it also is stupidly strict about the "todo" script it accepts: while it parses commands in a way that was *designed* to be similar to the interactive rebase, it then goes on to *error out* if the commands disagree with the overall action (cherry-pick or revert). Finally, the sequencer code chose to deviate from the interactive rebase code insofar that when it comes to writing the file with the remaining commands, it *reformats* the "todo" script instead of just writing the part of the parsed script that were not yet processed. This is not only unnecessary churn, but might well lose information that is valuable to the user (i.e. comments after the commands). Let's just bite the bullet and rewrite the entire parser; the code now becomes not only more elegant: it allows us to go on and teach the sequencer how to parse *true* "todo" scripts as used by the interactive rebase itself. In a way, the sequencer is about to grow up to do its older brother's job. Better. In particular, we choose to maintain the list of commands in an array instead of a linked list: this is flexible enough to allow us later on to even implement rebase -i's reordering of fixup!/squash! commits very easily (and with a very nice speed bonus, at least on Windows). While at it, do not stop at the first problem, but list *all* of the problems. This will help the user when the sequencer will do `rebase -i`'s work by allowing to address all issues in one go rather than going back and forth until the todo list is valid. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-10-21 15:24:41 +03:00
error(command == TODO_REVERT
? _("could not revert %s... %s")
: _("could not apply %s... %s"),
short_commit_name(commit), msg.subject);
print_advice(res == 1, opts);
rerere(opts->allow_rerere_auto);
goto leave;
}
allow = allow_empty(opts, commit);
if (allow < 0) {
res = allow;
goto leave;
}
if (!opts->no_commit)
res = run_git_commit(opts->edit ? NULL : git_path_merge_msg(),
opts, allow, opts->edit, 0, 0);
leave:
free_message(commit, &msg);
update_abort_safety_file();
return res;
}
static int prepare_revs(struct replay_opts *opts)
{
cherry-pick/revert: respect order of revisions to pick When giving multiple individual revisions to cherry-pick or revert, as in 'git cherry-pick A B' or 'git revert B A', one would expect them to be picked/reverted in the order given on the command line. They are instead ordered by their commit timestamp -- in chronological order for "cherry-pick" and in reverse chronological order for "revert". This matches the order in which one would usually give them on the command line, making this bug somewhat hard to notice. Still, it has been reported at least once before [1]. It seems like the chronological sorting happened by accident because the revision walker has traditionally always sorted commits in reverse chronological order when rev_info.no_walk was enabled. In the case of 'git revert B A' where B is newer than A, this sorting is a no-op. For 'git cherry-pick A B', the sorting would reverse the arguments, but because the sequencer also flips the rev_info.reverse flag when picking (as opposed to reverting), the end result is a chronological order. The rev_info.reverse flag was probably flipped so that the revision walker emits B before C in 'git cherry-pick A..C'; that it happened to effectively undo the unexpected sorting done when not walking, was probably a coincidence that allowed this bug to happen at all. Fix the bug by telling the revision walker not to sort the commits when not walking. The only case we want to reverse the order is now when cherry-picking and walking revisions (rev_info.no_walk = 0). [1] http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/164794 Signed-off-by: Martin von Zweigbergk <martinvonz@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2012-08-29 10:15:56 +04:00
/*
* picking (but not reverting) ranges (but not individual revisions)
* should be done in reverse
*/
if (opts->action == REPLAY_PICK && !opts->revs->no_walk)
opts->revs->reverse ^= 1;
if (prepare_revision_walk(opts->revs))
return error(_("revision walk setup failed"));
if (!opts->revs->commits)
return error(_("empty commit set passed"));
return 0;
}
static int read_and_refresh_cache(struct replay_opts *opts)
{
static struct lock_file index_lock;
int index_fd = hold_locked_index(&index_lock, 0);
if (read_index_preload(&the_index, NULL) < 0) {
rollback_lock_file(&index_lock);
return error(_("git %s: failed to read the index"),
_(action_name(opts)));
}
refresh_index(&the_index, REFRESH_QUIET|REFRESH_UNMERGED, NULL, NULL, NULL);
if (the_index.cache_changed && index_fd >= 0) {
if (write_locked_index(&the_index, &index_lock, COMMIT_LOCK)) {
rollback_lock_file(&index_lock);
return error(_("git %s: failed to refresh the index"),
_(action_name(opts)));
}
}
rollback_lock_file(&index_lock);
return 0;
}
sequencer: completely revamp the "todo" script parsing When we came up with the "sequencer" idea, we really wanted to have kind of a plumbing equivalent of the interactive rebase. Hence the choice of words: the "todo" script, a "pick", etc. However, when it came time to implement the entire shebang, somehow this idea got lost and the sequencer was used as working horse for cherry-pick and revert instead. So as not to interfere with the interactive rebase, it even uses a separate directory to store its state. Furthermore, it also is stupidly strict about the "todo" script it accepts: while it parses commands in a way that was *designed* to be similar to the interactive rebase, it then goes on to *error out* if the commands disagree with the overall action (cherry-pick or revert). Finally, the sequencer code chose to deviate from the interactive rebase code insofar that when it comes to writing the file with the remaining commands, it *reformats* the "todo" script instead of just writing the part of the parsed script that were not yet processed. This is not only unnecessary churn, but might well lose information that is valuable to the user (i.e. comments after the commands). Let's just bite the bullet and rewrite the entire parser; the code now becomes not only more elegant: it allows us to go on and teach the sequencer how to parse *true* "todo" scripts as used by the interactive rebase itself. In a way, the sequencer is about to grow up to do its older brother's job. Better. In particular, we choose to maintain the list of commands in an array instead of a linked list: this is flexible enough to allow us later on to even implement rebase -i's reordering of fixup!/squash! commits very easily (and with a very nice speed bonus, at least on Windows). While at it, do not stop at the first problem, but list *all* of the problems. This will help the user when the sequencer will do `rebase -i`'s work by allowing to address all issues in one go rather than going back and forth until the todo list is valid. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-10-21 15:24:41 +03:00
struct todo_item {
enum todo_command command;
struct commit *commit;
const char *arg;
int arg_len;
sequencer: completely revamp the "todo" script parsing When we came up with the "sequencer" idea, we really wanted to have kind of a plumbing equivalent of the interactive rebase. Hence the choice of words: the "todo" script, a "pick", etc. However, when it came time to implement the entire shebang, somehow this idea got lost and the sequencer was used as working horse for cherry-pick and revert instead. So as not to interfere with the interactive rebase, it even uses a separate directory to store its state. Furthermore, it also is stupidly strict about the "todo" script it accepts: while it parses commands in a way that was *designed* to be similar to the interactive rebase, it then goes on to *error out* if the commands disagree with the overall action (cherry-pick or revert). Finally, the sequencer code chose to deviate from the interactive rebase code insofar that when it comes to writing the file with the remaining commands, it *reformats* the "todo" script instead of just writing the part of the parsed script that were not yet processed. This is not only unnecessary churn, but might well lose information that is valuable to the user (i.e. comments after the commands). Let's just bite the bullet and rewrite the entire parser; the code now becomes not only more elegant: it allows us to go on and teach the sequencer how to parse *true* "todo" scripts as used by the interactive rebase itself. In a way, the sequencer is about to grow up to do its older brother's job. Better. In particular, we choose to maintain the list of commands in an array instead of a linked list: this is flexible enough to allow us later on to even implement rebase -i's reordering of fixup!/squash! commits very easily (and with a very nice speed bonus, at least on Windows). While at it, do not stop at the first problem, but list *all* of the problems. This will help the user when the sequencer will do `rebase -i`'s work by allowing to address all issues in one go rather than going back and forth until the todo list is valid. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-10-21 15:24:41 +03:00
size_t offset_in_buf;
};
struct todo_list {
struct strbuf buf;
struct todo_item *items;
int nr, alloc, current;
};
#define TODO_LIST_INIT { STRBUF_INIT }
static void todo_list_release(struct todo_list *todo_list)
{
sequencer: completely revamp the "todo" script parsing When we came up with the "sequencer" idea, we really wanted to have kind of a plumbing equivalent of the interactive rebase. Hence the choice of words: the "todo" script, a "pick", etc. However, when it came time to implement the entire shebang, somehow this idea got lost and the sequencer was used as working horse for cherry-pick and revert instead. So as not to interfere with the interactive rebase, it even uses a separate directory to store its state. Furthermore, it also is stupidly strict about the "todo" script it accepts: while it parses commands in a way that was *designed* to be similar to the interactive rebase, it then goes on to *error out* if the commands disagree with the overall action (cherry-pick or revert). Finally, the sequencer code chose to deviate from the interactive rebase code insofar that when it comes to writing the file with the remaining commands, it *reformats* the "todo" script instead of just writing the part of the parsed script that were not yet processed. This is not only unnecessary churn, but might well lose information that is valuable to the user (i.e. comments after the commands). Let's just bite the bullet and rewrite the entire parser; the code now becomes not only more elegant: it allows us to go on and teach the sequencer how to parse *true* "todo" scripts as used by the interactive rebase itself. In a way, the sequencer is about to grow up to do its older brother's job. Better. In particular, we choose to maintain the list of commands in an array instead of a linked list: this is flexible enough to allow us later on to even implement rebase -i's reordering of fixup!/squash! commits very easily (and with a very nice speed bonus, at least on Windows). While at it, do not stop at the first problem, but list *all* of the problems. This will help the user when the sequencer will do `rebase -i`'s work by allowing to address all issues in one go rather than going back and forth until the todo list is valid. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-10-21 15:24:41 +03:00
strbuf_release(&todo_list->buf);
free(todo_list->items);
todo_list->items = NULL;
todo_list->nr = todo_list->alloc = 0;
}
sequencer: completely revamp the "todo" script parsing When we came up with the "sequencer" idea, we really wanted to have kind of a plumbing equivalent of the interactive rebase. Hence the choice of words: the "todo" script, a "pick", etc. However, when it came time to implement the entire shebang, somehow this idea got lost and the sequencer was used as working horse for cherry-pick and revert instead. So as not to interfere with the interactive rebase, it even uses a separate directory to store its state. Furthermore, it also is stupidly strict about the "todo" script it accepts: while it parses commands in a way that was *designed* to be similar to the interactive rebase, it then goes on to *error out* if the commands disagree with the overall action (cherry-pick or revert). Finally, the sequencer code chose to deviate from the interactive rebase code insofar that when it comes to writing the file with the remaining commands, it *reformats* the "todo" script instead of just writing the part of the parsed script that were not yet processed. This is not only unnecessary churn, but might well lose information that is valuable to the user (i.e. comments after the commands). Let's just bite the bullet and rewrite the entire parser; the code now becomes not only more elegant: it allows us to go on and teach the sequencer how to parse *true* "todo" scripts as used by the interactive rebase itself. In a way, the sequencer is about to grow up to do its older brother's job. Better. In particular, we choose to maintain the list of commands in an array instead of a linked list: this is flexible enough to allow us later on to even implement rebase -i's reordering of fixup!/squash! commits very easily (and with a very nice speed bonus, at least on Windows). While at it, do not stop at the first problem, but list *all* of the problems. This will help the user when the sequencer will do `rebase -i`'s work by allowing to address all issues in one go rather than going back and forth until the todo list is valid. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-10-21 15:24:41 +03:00
static struct todo_item *append_new_todo(struct todo_list *todo_list)
{
ALLOC_GROW(todo_list->items, todo_list->nr + 1, todo_list->alloc);
return todo_list->items + todo_list->nr++;
}
sequencer: completely revamp the "todo" script parsing When we came up with the "sequencer" idea, we really wanted to have kind of a plumbing equivalent of the interactive rebase. Hence the choice of words: the "todo" script, a "pick", etc. However, when it came time to implement the entire shebang, somehow this idea got lost and the sequencer was used as working horse for cherry-pick and revert instead. So as not to interfere with the interactive rebase, it even uses a separate directory to store its state. Furthermore, it also is stupidly strict about the "todo" script it accepts: while it parses commands in a way that was *designed* to be similar to the interactive rebase, it then goes on to *error out* if the commands disagree with the overall action (cherry-pick or revert). Finally, the sequencer code chose to deviate from the interactive rebase code insofar that when it comes to writing the file with the remaining commands, it *reformats* the "todo" script instead of just writing the part of the parsed script that were not yet processed. This is not only unnecessary churn, but might well lose information that is valuable to the user (i.e. comments after the commands). Let's just bite the bullet and rewrite the entire parser; the code now becomes not only more elegant: it allows us to go on and teach the sequencer how to parse *true* "todo" scripts as used by the interactive rebase itself. In a way, the sequencer is about to grow up to do its older brother's job. Better. In particular, we choose to maintain the list of commands in an array instead of a linked list: this is flexible enough to allow us later on to even implement rebase -i's reordering of fixup!/squash! commits very easily (and with a very nice speed bonus, at least on Windows). While at it, do not stop at the first problem, but list *all* of the problems. This will help the user when the sequencer will do `rebase -i`'s work by allowing to address all issues in one go rather than going back and forth until the todo list is valid. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-10-21 15:24:41 +03:00
static int parse_insn_line(struct todo_item *item, const char *bol, char *eol)
{
unsigned char commit_sha1[20];
char *end_of_object_name;
sequencer: completely revamp the "todo" script parsing When we came up with the "sequencer" idea, we really wanted to have kind of a plumbing equivalent of the interactive rebase. Hence the choice of words: the "todo" script, a "pick", etc. However, when it came time to implement the entire shebang, somehow this idea got lost and the sequencer was used as working horse for cherry-pick and revert instead. So as not to interfere with the interactive rebase, it even uses a separate directory to store its state. Furthermore, it also is stupidly strict about the "todo" script it accepts: while it parses commands in a way that was *designed* to be similar to the interactive rebase, it then goes on to *error out* if the commands disagree with the overall action (cherry-pick or revert). Finally, the sequencer code chose to deviate from the interactive rebase code insofar that when it comes to writing the file with the remaining commands, it *reformats* the "todo" script instead of just writing the part of the parsed script that were not yet processed. This is not only unnecessary churn, but might well lose information that is valuable to the user (i.e. comments after the commands). Let's just bite the bullet and rewrite the entire parser; the code now becomes not only more elegant: it allows us to go on and teach the sequencer how to parse *true* "todo" scripts as used by the interactive rebase itself. In a way, the sequencer is about to grow up to do its older brother's job. Better. In particular, we choose to maintain the list of commands in an array instead of a linked list: this is flexible enough to allow us later on to even implement rebase -i's reordering of fixup!/squash! commits very easily (and with a very nice speed bonus, at least on Windows). While at it, do not stop at the first problem, but list *all* of the problems. This will help the user when the sequencer will do `rebase -i`'s work by allowing to address all issues in one go rather than going back and forth until the todo list is valid. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-10-21 15:24:41 +03:00
int i, saved, status, padding;
/* left-trim */
bol += strspn(bol, " \t");
if (bol == eol || *bol == '\r' || *bol == comment_line_char) {
item->command = TODO_NOOP;
item->commit = NULL;
item->arg = bol;
item->arg_len = eol - bol;
return 0;
}
sequencer: completely revamp the "todo" script parsing When we came up with the "sequencer" idea, we really wanted to have kind of a plumbing equivalent of the interactive rebase. Hence the choice of words: the "todo" script, a "pick", etc. However, when it came time to implement the entire shebang, somehow this idea got lost and the sequencer was used as working horse for cherry-pick and revert instead. So as not to interfere with the interactive rebase, it even uses a separate directory to store its state. Furthermore, it also is stupidly strict about the "todo" script it accepts: while it parses commands in a way that was *designed* to be similar to the interactive rebase, it then goes on to *error out* if the commands disagree with the overall action (cherry-pick or revert). Finally, the sequencer code chose to deviate from the interactive rebase code insofar that when it comes to writing the file with the remaining commands, it *reformats* the "todo" script instead of just writing the part of the parsed script that were not yet processed. This is not only unnecessary churn, but might well lose information that is valuable to the user (i.e. comments after the commands). Let's just bite the bullet and rewrite the entire parser; the code now becomes not only more elegant: it allows us to go on and teach the sequencer how to parse *true* "todo" scripts as used by the interactive rebase itself. In a way, the sequencer is about to grow up to do its older brother's job. Better. In particular, we choose to maintain the list of commands in an array instead of a linked list: this is flexible enough to allow us later on to even implement rebase -i's reordering of fixup!/squash! commits very easily (and with a very nice speed bonus, at least on Windows). While at it, do not stop at the first problem, but list *all* of the problems. This will help the user when the sequencer will do `rebase -i`'s work by allowing to address all issues in one go rather than going back and forth until the todo list is valid. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-10-21 15:24:41 +03:00
for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(todo_command_strings); i++)
if (skip_prefix(bol, todo_command_strings[i], &bol)) {
item->command = i;
break;
}
if (i >= ARRAY_SIZE(todo_command_strings))
return -1;
if (item->command == TODO_NOOP) {
item->commit = NULL;
item->arg = bol;
item->arg_len = eol - bol;
return 0;
}
/* Eat up extra spaces/ tabs before object name */
padding = strspn(bol, " \t");
if (!padding)
sequencer: completely revamp the "todo" script parsing When we came up with the "sequencer" idea, we really wanted to have kind of a plumbing equivalent of the interactive rebase. Hence the choice of words: the "todo" script, a "pick", etc. However, when it came time to implement the entire shebang, somehow this idea got lost and the sequencer was used as working horse for cherry-pick and revert instead. So as not to interfere with the interactive rebase, it even uses a separate directory to store its state. Furthermore, it also is stupidly strict about the "todo" script it accepts: while it parses commands in a way that was *designed* to be similar to the interactive rebase, it then goes on to *error out* if the commands disagree with the overall action (cherry-pick or revert). Finally, the sequencer code chose to deviate from the interactive rebase code insofar that when it comes to writing the file with the remaining commands, it *reformats* the "todo" script instead of just writing the part of the parsed script that were not yet processed. This is not only unnecessary churn, but might well lose information that is valuable to the user (i.e. comments after the commands). Let's just bite the bullet and rewrite the entire parser; the code now becomes not only more elegant: it allows us to go on and teach the sequencer how to parse *true* "todo" scripts as used by the interactive rebase itself. In a way, the sequencer is about to grow up to do its older brother's job. Better. In particular, we choose to maintain the list of commands in an array instead of a linked list: this is flexible enough to allow us later on to even implement rebase -i's reordering of fixup!/squash! commits very easily (and with a very nice speed bonus, at least on Windows). While at it, do not stop at the first problem, but list *all* of the problems. This will help the user when the sequencer will do `rebase -i`'s work by allowing to address all issues in one go rather than going back and forth until the todo list is valid. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-10-21 15:24:41 +03:00
return -1;
bol += padding;
sequencer: completely revamp the "todo" script parsing When we came up with the "sequencer" idea, we really wanted to have kind of a plumbing equivalent of the interactive rebase. Hence the choice of words: the "todo" script, a "pick", etc. However, when it came time to implement the entire shebang, somehow this idea got lost and the sequencer was used as working horse for cherry-pick and revert instead. So as not to interfere with the interactive rebase, it even uses a separate directory to store its state. Furthermore, it also is stupidly strict about the "todo" script it accepts: while it parses commands in a way that was *designed* to be similar to the interactive rebase, it then goes on to *error out* if the commands disagree with the overall action (cherry-pick or revert). Finally, the sequencer code chose to deviate from the interactive rebase code insofar that when it comes to writing the file with the remaining commands, it *reformats* the "todo" script instead of just writing the part of the parsed script that were not yet processed. This is not only unnecessary churn, but might well lose information that is valuable to the user (i.e. comments after the commands). Let's just bite the bullet and rewrite the entire parser; the code now becomes not only more elegant: it allows us to go on and teach the sequencer how to parse *true* "todo" scripts as used by the interactive rebase itself. In a way, the sequencer is about to grow up to do its older brother's job. Better. In particular, we choose to maintain the list of commands in an array instead of a linked list: this is flexible enough to allow us later on to even implement rebase -i's reordering of fixup!/squash! commits very easily (and with a very nice speed bonus, at least on Windows). While at it, do not stop at the first problem, but list *all* of the problems. This will help the user when the sequencer will do `rebase -i`'s work by allowing to address all issues in one go rather than going back and forth until the todo list is valid. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-10-21 15:24:41 +03:00
end_of_object_name = (char *) bol + strcspn(bol, " \t\n");
saved = *end_of_object_name;
*end_of_object_name = '\0';
status = get_sha1(bol, commit_sha1);
*end_of_object_name = saved;
item->arg = end_of_object_name + strspn(end_of_object_name, " \t");
item->arg_len = (int)(eol - item->arg);
if (status < 0)
sequencer: completely revamp the "todo" script parsing When we came up with the "sequencer" idea, we really wanted to have kind of a plumbing equivalent of the interactive rebase. Hence the choice of words: the "todo" script, a "pick", etc. However, when it came time to implement the entire shebang, somehow this idea got lost and the sequencer was used as working horse for cherry-pick and revert instead. So as not to interfere with the interactive rebase, it even uses a separate directory to store its state. Furthermore, it also is stupidly strict about the "todo" script it accepts: while it parses commands in a way that was *designed* to be similar to the interactive rebase, it then goes on to *error out* if the commands disagree with the overall action (cherry-pick or revert). Finally, the sequencer code chose to deviate from the interactive rebase code insofar that when it comes to writing the file with the remaining commands, it *reformats* the "todo" script instead of just writing the part of the parsed script that were not yet processed. This is not only unnecessary churn, but might well lose information that is valuable to the user (i.e. comments after the commands). Let's just bite the bullet and rewrite the entire parser; the code now becomes not only more elegant: it allows us to go on and teach the sequencer how to parse *true* "todo" scripts as used by the interactive rebase itself. In a way, the sequencer is about to grow up to do its older brother's job. Better. In particular, we choose to maintain the list of commands in an array instead of a linked list: this is flexible enough to allow us later on to even implement rebase -i's reordering of fixup!/squash! commits very easily (and with a very nice speed bonus, at least on Windows). While at it, do not stop at the first problem, but list *all* of the problems. This will help the user when the sequencer will do `rebase -i`'s work by allowing to address all issues in one go rather than going back and forth until the todo list is valid. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-10-21 15:24:41 +03:00
return -1;
sequencer: completely revamp the "todo" script parsing When we came up with the "sequencer" idea, we really wanted to have kind of a plumbing equivalent of the interactive rebase. Hence the choice of words: the "todo" script, a "pick", etc. However, when it came time to implement the entire shebang, somehow this idea got lost and the sequencer was used as working horse for cherry-pick and revert instead. So as not to interfere with the interactive rebase, it even uses a separate directory to store its state. Furthermore, it also is stupidly strict about the "todo" script it accepts: while it parses commands in a way that was *designed* to be similar to the interactive rebase, it then goes on to *error out* if the commands disagree with the overall action (cherry-pick or revert). Finally, the sequencer code chose to deviate from the interactive rebase code insofar that when it comes to writing the file with the remaining commands, it *reformats* the "todo" script instead of just writing the part of the parsed script that were not yet processed. This is not only unnecessary churn, but might well lose information that is valuable to the user (i.e. comments after the commands). Let's just bite the bullet and rewrite the entire parser; the code now becomes not only more elegant: it allows us to go on and teach the sequencer how to parse *true* "todo" scripts as used by the interactive rebase itself. In a way, the sequencer is about to grow up to do its older brother's job. Better. In particular, we choose to maintain the list of commands in an array instead of a linked list: this is flexible enough to allow us later on to even implement rebase -i's reordering of fixup!/squash! commits very easily (and with a very nice speed bonus, at least on Windows). While at it, do not stop at the first problem, but list *all* of the problems. This will help the user when the sequencer will do `rebase -i`'s work by allowing to address all issues in one go rather than going back and forth until the todo list is valid. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-10-21 15:24:41 +03:00
item->commit = lookup_commit_reference(commit_sha1);
return !item->commit;
}
sequencer: completely revamp the "todo" script parsing When we came up with the "sequencer" idea, we really wanted to have kind of a plumbing equivalent of the interactive rebase. Hence the choice of words: the "todo" script, a "pick", etc. However, when it came time to implement the entire shebang, somehow this idea got lost and the sequencer was used as working horse for cherry-pick and revert instead. So as not to interfere with the interactive rebase, it even uses a separate directory to store its state. Furthermore, it also is stupidly strict about the "todo" script it accepts: while it parses commands in a way that was *designed* to be similar to the interactive rebase, it then goes on to *error out* if the commands disagree with the overall action (cherry-pick or revert). Finally, the sequencer code chose to deviate from the interactive rebase code insofar that when it comes to writing the file with the remaining commands, it *reformats* the "todo" script instead of just writing the part of the parsed script that were not yet processed. This is not only unnecessary churn, but might well lose information that is valuable to the user (i.e. comments after the commands). Let's just bite the bullet and rewrite the entire parser; the code now becomes not only more elegant: it allows us to go on and teach the sequencer how to parse *true* "todo" scripts as used by the interactive rebase itself. In a way, the sequencer is about to grow up to do its older brother's job. Better. In particular, we choose to maintain the list of commands in an array instead of a linked list: this is flexible enough to allow us later on to even implement rebase -i's reordering of fixup!/squash! commits very easily (and with a very nice speed bonus, at least on Windows). While at it, do not stop at the first problem, but list *all* of the problems. This will help the user when the sequencer will do `rebase -i`'s work by allowing to address all issues in one go rather than going back and forth until the todo list is valid. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-10-21 15:24:41 +03:00
static int parse_insn_buffer(char *buf, struct todo_list *todo_list)
{
sequencer: completely revamp the "todo" script parsing When we came up with the "sequencer" idea, we really wanted to have kind of a plumbing equivalent of the interactive rebase. Hence the choice of words: the "todo" script, a "pick", etc. However, when it came time to implement the entire shebang, somehow this idea got lost and the sequencer was used as working horse for cherry-pick and revert instead. So as not to interfere with the interactive rebase, it even uses a separate directory to store its state. Furthermore, it also is stupidly strict about the "todo" script it accepts: while it parses commands in a way that was *designed* to be similar to the interactive rebase, it then goes on to *error out* if the commands disagree with the overall action (cherry-pick or revert). Finally, the sequencer code chose to deviate from the interactive rebase code insofar that when it comes to writing the file with the remaining commands, it *reformats* the "todo" script instead of just writing the part of the parsed script that were not yet processed. This is not only unnecessary churn, but might well lose information that is valuable to the user (i.e. comments after the commands). Let's just bite the bullet and rewrite the entire parser; the code now becomes not only more elegant: it allows us to go on and teach the sequencer how to parse *true* "todo" scripts as used by the interactive rebase itself. In a way, the sequencer is about to grow up to do its older brother's job. Better. In particular, we choose to maintain the list of commands in an array instead of a linked list: this is flexible enough to allow us later on to even implement rebase -i's reordering of fixup!/squash! commits very easily (and with a very nice speed bonus, at least on Windows). While at it, do not stop at the first problem, but list *all* of the problems. This will help the user when the sequencer will do `rebase -i`'s work by allowing to address all issues in one go rather than going back and forth until the todo list is valid. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-10-21 15:24:41 +03:00
struct todo_item *item;
char *p = buf, *next_p;
int i, res = 0;
sequencer: completely revamp the "todo" script parsing When we came up with the "sequencer" idea, we really wanted to have kind of a plumbing equivalent of the interactive rebase. Hence the choice of words: the "todo" script, a "pick", etc. However, when it came time to implement the entire shebang, somehow this idea got lost and the sequencer was used as working horse for cherry-pick and revert instead. So as not to interfere with the interactive rebase, it even uses a separate directory to store its state. Furthermore, it also is stupidly strict about the "todo" script it accepts: while it parses commands in a way that was *designed* to be similar to the interactive rebase, it then goes on to *error out* if the commands disagree with the overall action (cherry-pick or revert). Finally, the sequencer code chose to deviate from the interactive rebase code insofar that when it comes to writing the file with the remaining commands, it *reformats* the "todo" script instead of just writing the part of the parsed script that were not yet processed. This is not only unnecessary churn, but might well lose information that is valuable to the user (i.e. comments after the commands). Let's just bite the bullet and rewrite the entire parser; the code now becomes not only more elegant: it allows us to go on and teach the sequencer how to parse *true* "todo" scripts as used by the interactive rebase itself. In a way, the sequencer is about to grow up to do its older brother's job. Better. In particular, we choose to maintain the list of commands in an array instead of a linked list: this is flexible enough to allow us later on to even implement rebase -i's reordering of fixup!/squash! commits very easily (and with a very nice speed bonus, at least on Windows). While at it, do not stop at the first problem, but list *all* of the problems. This will help the user when the sequencer will do `rebase -i`'s work by allowing to address all issues in one go rather than going back and forth until the todo list is valid. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-10-21 15:24:41 +03:00
for (i = 1; *p; i++, p = next_p) {
char *eol = strchrnul(p, '\n');
sequencer: completely revamp the "todo" script parsing When we came up with the "sequencer" idea, we really wanted to have kind of a plumbing equivalent of the interactive rebase. Hence the choice of words: the "todo" script, a "pick", etc. However, when it came time to implement the entire shebang, somehow this idea got lost and the sequencer was used as working horse for cherry-pick and revert instead. So as not to interfere with the interactive rebase, it even uses a separate directory to store its state. Furthermore, it also is stupidly strict about the "todo" script it accepts: while it parses commands in a way that was *designed* to be similar to the interactive rebase, it then goes on to *error out* if the commands disagree with the overall action (cherry-pick or revert). Finally, the sequencer code chose to deviate from the interactive rebase code insofar that when it comes to writing the file with the remaining commands, it *reformats* the "todo" script instead of just writing the part of the parsed script that were not yet processed. This is not only unnecessary churn, but might well lose information that is valuable to the user (i.e. comments after the commands). Let's just bite the bullet and rewrite the entire parser; the code now becomes not only more elegant: it allows us to go on and teach the sequencer how to parse *true* "todo" scripts as used by the interactive rebase itself. In a way, the sequencer is about to grow up to do its older brother's job. Better. In particular, we choose to maintain the list of commands in an array instead of a linked list: this is flexible enough to allow us later on to even implement rebase -i's reordering of fixup!/squash! commits very easily (and with a very nice speed bonus, at least on Windows). While at it, do not stop at the first problem, but list *all* of the problems. This will help the user when the sequencer will do `rebase -i`'s work by allowing to address all issues in one go rather than going back and forth until the todo list is valid. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-10-21 15:24:41 +03:00
next_p = *eol ? eol + 1 /* skip LF */ : eol;
if (p != eol && eol[-1] == '\r')
eol--; /* strip Carriage Return */
sequencer: completely revamp the "todo" script parsing When we came up with the "sequencer" idea, we really wanted to have kind of a plumbing equivalent of the interactive rebase. Hence the choice of words: the "todo" script, a "pick", etc. However, when it came time to implement the entire shebang, somehow this idea got lost and the sequencer was used as working horse for cherry-pick and revert instead. So as not to interfere with the interactive rebase, it even uses a separate directory to store its state. Furthermore, it also is stupidly strict about the "todo" script it accepts: while it parses commands in a way that was *designed* to be similar to the interactive rebase, it then goes on to *error out* if the commands disagree with the overall action (cherry-pick or revert). Finally, the sequencer code chose to deviate from the interactive rebase code insofar that when it comes to writing the file with the remaining commands, it *reformats* the "todo" script instead of just writing the part of the parsed script that were not yet processed. This is not only unnecessary churn, but might well lose information that is valuable to the user (i.e. comments after the commands). Let's just bite the bullet and rewrite the entire parser; the code now becomes not only more elegant: it allows us to go on and teach the sequencer how to parse *true* "todo" scripts as used by the interactive rebase itself. In a way, the sequencer is about to grow up to do its older brother's job. Better. In particular, we choose to maintain the list of commands in an array instead of a linked list: this is flexible enough to allow us later on to even implement rebase -i's reordering of fixup!/squash! commits very easily (and with a very nice speed bonus, at least on Windows). While at it, do not stop at the first problem, but list *all* of the problems. This will help the user when the sequencer will do `rebase -i`'s work by allowing to address all issues in one go rather than going back and forth until the todo list is valid. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-10-21 15:24:41 +03:00
item = append_new_todo(todo_list);
item->offset_in_buf = p - todo_list->buf.buf;
if (parse_insn_line(item, p, eol)) {
res = error(_("invalid line %d: %.*s"),
sequencer: completely revamp the "todo" script parsing When we came up with the "sequencer" idea, we really wanted to have kind of a plumbing equivalent of the interactive rebase. Hence the choice of words: the "todo" script, a "pick", etc. However, when it came time to implement the entire shebang, somehow this idea got lost and the sequencer was used as working horse for cherry-pick and revert instead. So as not to interfere with the interactive rebase, it even uses a separate directory to store its state. Furthermore, it also is stupidly strict about the "todo" script it accepts: while it parses commands in a way that was *designed* to be similar to the interactive rebase, it then goes on to *error out* if the commands disagree with the overall action (cherry-pick or revert). Finally, the sequencer code chose to deviate from the interactive rebase code insofar that when it comes to writing the file with the remaining commands, it *reformats* the "todo" script instead of just writing the part of the parsed script that were not yet processed. This is not only unnecessary churn, but might well lose information that is valuable to the user (i.e. comments after the commands). Let's just bite the bullet and rewrite the entire parser; the code now becomes not only more elegant: it allows us to go on and teach the sequencer how to parse *true* "todo" scripts as used by the interactive rebase itself. In a way, the sequencer is about to grow up to do its older brother's job. Better. In particular, we choose to maintain the list of commands in an array instead of a linked list: this is flexible enough to allow us later on to even implement rebase -i's reordering of fixup!/squash! commits very easily (and with a very nice speed bonus, at least on Windows). While at it, do not stop at the first problem, but list *all* of the problems. This will help the user when the sequencer will do `rebase -i`'s work by allowing to address all issues in one go rather than going back and forth until the todo list is valid. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-10-21 15:24:41 +03:00
i, (int)(eol - p), p);
item->command = -1;
}
}
sequencer: completely revamp the "todo" script parsing When we came up with the "sequencer" idea, we really wanted to have kind of a plumbing equivalent of the interactive rebase. Hence the choice of words: the "todo" script, a "pick", etc. However, when it came time to implement the entire shebang, somehow this idea got lost and the sequencer was used as working horse for cherry-pick and revert instead. So as not to interfere with the interactive rebase, it even uses a separate directory to store its state. Furthermore, it also is stupidly strict about the "todo" script it accepts: while it parses commands in a way that was *designed* to be similar to the interactive rebase, it then goes on to *error out* if the commands disagree with the overall action (cherry-pick or revert). Finally, the sequencer code chose to deviate from the interactive rebase code insofar that when it comes to writing the file with the remaining commands, it *reformats* the "todo" script instead of just writing the part of the parsed script that were not yet processed. This is not only unnecessary churn, but might well lose information that is valuable to the user (i.e. comments after the commands). Let's just bite the bullet and rewrite the entire parser; the code now becomes not only more elegant: it allows us to go on and teach the sequencer how to parse *true* "todo" scripts as used by the interactive rebase itself. In a way, the sequencer is about to grow up to do its older brother's job. Better. In particular, we choose to maintain the list of commands in an array instead of a linked list: this is flexible enough to allow us later on to even implement rebase -i's reordering of fixup!/squash! commits very easily (and with a very nice speed bonus, at least on Windows). While at it, do not stop at the first problem, but list *all* of the problems. This will help the user when the sequencer will do `rebase -i`'s work by allowing to address all issues in one go rather than going back and forth until the todo list is valid. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-10-21 15:24:41 +03:00
if (!todo_list->nr)
return error(_("no commits parsed."));
sequencer: completely revamp the "todo" script parsing When we came up with the "sequencer" idea, we really wanted to have kind of a plumbing equivalent of the interactive rebase. Hence the choice of words: the "todo" script, a "pick", etc. However, when it came time to implement the entire shebang, somehow this idea got lost and the sequencer was used as working horse for cherry-pick and revert instead. So as not to interfere with the interactive rebase, it even uses a separate directory to store its state. Furthermore, it also is stupidly strict about the "todo" script it accepts: while it parses commands in a way that was *designed* to be similar to the interactive rebase, it then goes on to *error out* if the commands disagree with the overall action (cherry-pick or revert). Finally, the sequencer code chose to deviate from the interactive rebase code insofar that when it comes to writing the file with the remaining commands, it *reformats* the "todo" script instead of just writing the part of the parsed script that were not yet processed. This is not only unnecessary churn, but might well lose information that is valuable to the user (i.e. comments after the commands). Let's just bite the bullet and rewrite the entire parser; the code now becomes not only more elegant: it allows us to go on and teach the sequencer how to parse *true* "todo" scripts as used by the interactive rebase itself. In a way, the sequencer is about to grow up to do its older brother's job. Better. In particular, we choose to maintain the list of commands in an array instead of a linked list: this is flexible enough to allow us later on to even implement rebase -i's reordering of fixup!/squash! commits very easily (and with a very nice speed bonus, at least on Windows). While at it, do not stop at the first problem, but list *all* of the problems. This will help the user when the sequencer will do `rebase -i`'s work by allowing to address all issues in one go rather than going back and forth until the todo list is valid. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-10-21 15:24:41 +03:00
return res;
}
sequencer: completely revamp the "todo" script parsing When we came up with the "sequencer" idea, we really wanted to have kind of a plumbing equivalent of the interactive rebase. Hence the choice of words: the "todo" script, a "pick", etc. However, when it came time to implement the entire shebang, somehow this idea got lost and the sequencer was used as working horse for cherry-pick and revert instead. So as not to interfere with the interactive rebase, it even uses a separate directory to store its state. Furthermore, it also is stupidly strict about the "todo" script it accepts: while it parses commands in a way that was *designed* to be similar to the interactive rebase, it then goes on to *error out* if the commands disagree with the overall action (cherry-pick or revert). Finally, the sequencer code chose to deviate from the interactive rebase code insofar that when it comes to writing the file with the remaining commands, it *reformats* the "todo" script instead of just writing the part of the parsed script that were not yet processed. This is not only unnecessary churn, but might well lose information that is valuable to the user (i.e. comments after the commands). Let's just bite the bullet and rewrite the entire parser; the code now becomes not only more elegant: it allows us to go on and teach the sequencer how to parse *true* "todo" scripts as used by the interactive rebase itself. In a way, the sequencer is about to grow up to do its older brother's job. Better. In particular, we choose to maintain the list of commands in an array instead of a linked list: this is flexible enough to allow us later on to even implement rebase -i's reordering of fixup!/squash! commits very easily (and with a very nice speed bonus, at least on Windows). While at it, do not stop at the first problem, but list *all* of the problems. This will help the user when the sequencer will do `rebase -i`'s work by allowing to address all issues in one go rather than going back and forth until the todo list is valid. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-10-21 15:24:41 +03:00
static int read_populate_todo(struct todo_list *todo_list,
struct replay_opts *opts)
{
const char *todo_file = get_todo_path(opts);
int fd, res;
sequencer: completely revamp the "todo" script parsing When we came up with the "sequencer" idea, we really wanted to have kind of a plumbing equivalent of the interactive rebase. Hence the choice of words: the "todo" script, a "pick", etc. However, when it came time to implement the entire shebang, somehow this idea got lost and the sequencer was used as working horse for cherry-pick and revert instead. So as not to interfere with the interactive rebase, it even uses a separate directory to store its state. Furthermore, it also is stupidly strict about the "todo" script it accepts: while it parses commands in a way that was *designed* to be similar to the interactive rebase, it then goes on to *error out* if the commands disagree with the overall action (cherry-pick or revert). Finally, the sequencer code chose to deviate from the interactive rebase code insofar that when it comes to writing the file with the remaining commands, it *reformats* the "todo" script instead of just writing the part of the parsed script that were not yet processed. This is not only unnecessary churn, but might well lose information that is valuable to the user (i.e. comments after the commands). Let's just bite the bullet and rewrite the entire parser; the code now becomes not only more elegant: it allows us to go on and teach the sequencer how to parse *true* "todo" scripts as used by the interactive rebase itself. In a way, the sequencer is about to grow up to do its older brother's job. Better. In particular, we choose to maintain the list of commands in an array instead of a linked list: this is flexible enough to allow us later on to even implement rebase -i's reordering of fixup!/squash! commits very easily (and with a very nice speed bonus, at least on Windows). While at it, do not stop at the first problem, but list *all* of the problems. This will help the user when the sequencer will do `rebase -i`'s work by allowing to address all issues in one go rather than going back and forth until the todo list is valid. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-10-21 15:24:41 +03:00
strbuf_reset(&todo_list->buf);
fd = open(todo_file, O_RDONLY);
if (fd < 0)
return error_errno(_("could not open '%s'"), todo_file);
sequencer: completely revamp the "todo" script parsing When we came up with the "sequencer" idea, we really wanted to have kind of a plumbing equivalent of the interactive rebase. Hence the choice of words: the "todo" script, a "pick", etc. However, when it came time to implement the entire shebang, somehow this idea got lost and the sequencer was used as working horse for cherry-pick and revert instead. So as not to interfere with the interactive rebase, it even uses a separate directory to store its state. Furthermore, it also is stupidly strict about the "todo" script it accepts: while it parses commands in a way that was *designed* to be similar to the interactive rebase, it then goes on to *error out* if the commands disagree with the overall action (cherry-pick or revert). Finally, the sequencer code chose to deviate from the interactive rebase code insofar that when it comes to writing the file with the remaining commands, it *reformats* the "todo" script instead of just writing the part of the parsed script that were not yet processed. This is not only unnecessary churn, but might well lose information that is valuable to the user (i.e. comments after the commands). Let's just bite the bullet and rewrite the entire parser; the code now becomes not only more elegant: it allows us to go on and teach the sequencer how to parse *true* "todo" scripts as used by the interactive rebase itself. In a way, the sequencer is about to grow up to do its older brother's job. Better. In particular, we choose to maintain the list of commands in an array instead of a linked list: this is flexible enough to allow us later on to even implement rebase -i's reordering of fixup!/squash! commits very easily (and with a very nice speed bonus, at least on Windows). While at it, do not stop at the first problem, but list *all* of the problems. This will help the user when the sequencer will do `rebase -i`'s work by allowing to address all issues in one go rather than going back and forth until the todo list is valid. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-10-21 15:24:41 +03:00
if (strbuf_read(&todo_list->buf, fd, 0) < 0) {
close(fd);
return error(_("could not read '%s'."), todo_file);
}
close(fd);
sequencer: completely revamp the "todo" script parsing When we came up with the "sequencer" idea, we really wanted to have kind of a plumbing equivalent of the interactive rebase. Hence the choice of words: the "todo" script, a "pick", etc. However, when it came time to implement the entire shebang, somehow this idea got lost and the sequencer was used as working horse for cherry-pick and revert instead. So as not to interfere with the interactive rebase, it even uses a separate directory to store its state. Furthermore, it also is stupidly strict about the "todo" script it accepts: while it parses commands in a way that was *designed* to be similar to the interactive rebase, it then goes on to *error out* if the commands disagree with the overall action (cherry-pick or revert). Finally, the sequencer code chose to deviate from the interactive rebase code insofar that when it comes to writing the file with the remaining commands, it *reformats* the "todo" script instead of just writing the part of the parsed script that were not yet processed. This is not only unnecessary churn, but might well lose information that is valuable to the user (i.e. comments after the commands). Let's just bite the bullet and rewrite the entire parser; the code now becomes not only more elegant: it allows us to go on and teach the sequencer how to parse *true* "todo" scripts as used by the interactive rebase itself. In a way, the sequencer is about to grow up to do its older brother's job. Better. In particular, we choose to maintain the list of commands in an array instead of a linked list: this is flexible enough to allow us later on to even implement rebase -i's reordering of fixup!/squash! commits very easily (and with a very nice speed bonus, at least on Windows). While at it, do not stop at the first problem, but list *all* of the problems. This will help the user when the sequencer will do `rebase -i`'s work by allowing to address all issues in one go rather than going back and forth until the todo list is valid. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-10-21 15:24:41 +03:00
res = parse_insn_buffer(todo_list->buf.buf, todo_list);
if (res)
return error(_("unusable instruction sheet: '%s'"), todo_file);
if (!is_rebase_i(opts)) {
sequencer: completely revamp the "todo" script parsing When we came up with the "sequencer" idea, we really wanted to have kind of a plumbing equivalent of the interactive rebase. Hence the choice of words: the "todo" script, a "pick", etc. However, when it came time to implement the entire shebang, somehow this idea got lost and the sequencer was used as working horse for cherry-pick and revert instead. So as not to interfere with the interactive rebase, it even uses a separate directory to store its state. Furthermore, it also is stupidly strict about the "todo" script it accepts: while it parses commands in a way that was *designed* to be similar to the interactive rebase, it then goes on to *error out* if the commands disagree with the overall action (cherry-pick or revert). Finally, the sequencer code chose to deviate from the interactive rebase code insofar that when it comes to writing the file with the remaining commands, it *reformats* the "todo" script instead of just writing the part of the parsed script that were not yet processed. This is not only unnecessary churn, but might well lose information that is valuable to the user (i.e. comments after the commands). Let's just bite the bullet and rewrite the entire parser; the code now becomes not only more elegant: it allows us to go on and teach the sequencer how to parse *true* "todo" scripts as used by the interactive rebase itself. In a way, the sequencer is about to grow up to do its older brother's job. Better. In particular, we choose to maintain the list of commands in an array instead of a linked list: this is flexible enough to allow us later on to even implement rebase -i's reordering of fixup!/squash! commits very easily (and with a very nice speed bonus, at least on Windows). While at it, do not stop at the first problem, but list *all* of the problems. This will help the user when the sequencer will do `rebase -i`'s work by allowing to address all issues in one go rather than going back and forth until the todo list is valid. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-10-21 15:24:41 +03:00
enum todo_command valid =
opts->action == REPLAY_PICK ? TODO_PICK : TODO_REVERT;
int i;
for (i = 0; i < todo_list->nr; i++)
if (valid == todo_list->items[i].command)
continue;
else if (valid == TODO_PICK)
return error(_("cannot cherry-pick during a revert."));
sequencer: completely revamp the "todo" script parsing When we came up with the "sequencer" idea, we really wanted to have kind of a plumbing equivalent of the interactive rebase. Hence the choice of words: the "todo" script, a "pick", etc. However, when it came time to implement the entire shebang, somehow this idea got lost and the sequencer was used as working horse for cherry-pick and revert instead. So as not to interfere with the interactive rebase, it even uses a separate directory to store its state. Furthermore, it also is stupidly strict about the "todo" script it accepts: while it parses commands in a way that was *designed* to be similar to the interactive rebase, it then goes on to *error out* if the commands disagree with the overall action (cherry-pick or revert). Finally, the sequencer code chose to deviate from the interactive rebase code insofar that when it comes to writing the file with the remaining commands, it *reformats* the "todo" script instead of just writing the part of the parsed script that were not yet processed. This is not only unnecessary churn, but might well lose information that is valuable to the user (i.e. comments after the commands). Let's just bite the bullet and rewrite the entire parser; the code now becomes not only more elegant: it allows us to go on and teach the sequencer how to parse *true* "todo" scripts as used by the interactive rebase itself. In a way, the sequencer is about to grow up to do its older brother's job. Better. In particular, we choose to maintain the list of commands in an array instead of a linked list: this is flexible enough to allow us later on to even implement rebase -i's reordering of fixup!/squash! commits very easily (and with a very nice speed bonus, at least on Windows). While at it, do not stop at the first problem, but list *all* of the problems. This will help the user when the sequencer will do `rebase -i`'s work by allowing to address all issues in one go rather than going back and forth until the todo list is valid. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-10-21 15:24:41 +03:00
else
return error(_("cannot revert during a cherry-pick."));
sequencer: completely revamp the "todo" script parsing When we came up with the "sequencer" idea, we really wanted to have kind of a plumbing equivalent of the interactive rebase. Hence the choice of words: the "todo" script, a "pick", etc. However, when it came time to implement the entire shebang, somehow this idea got lost and the sequencer was used as working horse for cherry-pick and revert instead. So as not to interfere with the interactive rebase, it even uses a separate directory to store its state. Furthermore, it also is stupidly strict about the "todo" script it accepts: while it parses commands in a way that was *designed* to be similar to the interactive rebase, it then goes on to *error out* if the commands disagree with the overall action (cherry-pick or revert). Finally, the sequencer code chose to deviate from the interactive rebase code insofar that when it comes to writing the file with the remaining commands, it *reformats* the "todo" script instead of just writing the part of the parsed script that were not yet processed. This is not only unnecessary churn, but might well lose information that is valuable to the user (i.e. comments after the commands). Let's just bite the bullet and rewrite the entire parser; the code now becomes not only more elegant: it allows us to go on and teach the sequencer how to parse *true* "todo" scripts as used by the interactive rebase itself. In a way, the sequencer is about to grow up to do its older brother's job. Better. In particular, we choose to maintain the list of commands in an array instead of a linked list: this is flexible enough to allow us later on to even implement rebase -i's reordering of fixup!/squash! commits very easily (and with a very nice speed bonus, at least on Windows). While at it, do not stop at the first problem, but list *all* of the problems. This will help the user when the sequencer will do `rebase -i`'s work by allowing to address all issues in one go rather than going back and forth until the todo list is valid. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-10-21 15:24:41 +03:00
}
return 0;
}
static int git_config_string_dup(char **dest,
const char *var, const char *value)
{
if (!value)
return config_error_nonbool(var);
free(*dest);
*dest = xstrdup(value);
return 0;
}
static int populate_opts_cb(const char *key, const char *value, void *data)
{
struct replay_opts *opts = data;
int error_flag = 1;
if (!value)
error_flag = 0;
else if (!strcmp(key, "options.no-commit"))
opts->no_commit = git_config_bool_or_int(key, value, &error_flag);
else if (!strcmp(key, "options.edit"))
opts->edit = git_config_bool_or_int(key, value, &error_flag);
else if (!strcmp(key, "options.signoff"))
opts->signoff = git_config_bool_or_int(key, value, &error_flag);
else if (!strcmp(key, "options.record-origin"))
opts->record_origin = git_config_bool_or_int(key, value, &error_flag);
else if (!strcmp(key, "options.allow-ff"))
opts->allow_ff = git_config_bool_or_int(key, value, &error_flag);
else if (!strcmp(key, "options.mainline"))
opts->mainline = git_config_int(key, value);
else if (!strcmp(key, "options.strategy"))
git_config_string_dup(&opts->strategy, key, value);
else if (!strcmp(key, "options.gpg-sign"))
git_config_string_dup(&opts->gpg_sign, key, value);
else if (!strcmp(key, "options.strategy-option")) {
ALLOC_GROW(opts->xopts, opts->xopts_nr + 1, opts->xopts_alloc);
opts->xopts[opts->xopts_nr++] = xstrdup(value);
} else
return error(_("invalid key: %s"), key);
if (!error_flag)
return error(_("invalid value for %s: %s"), key, value);
return 0;
}
static int read_populate_opts(struct replay_opts *opts)
{
if (is_rebase_i(opts)) {
struct strbuf buf = STRBUF_INIT;
if (read_oneliner(&buf, rebase_path_gpg_sign_opt(), 1)) {
if (!starts_with(buf.buf, "-S"))
strbuf_reset(&buf);
else {
free(opts->gpg_sign);
opts->gpg_sign = xstrdup(buf.buf + 2);
}
}
strbuf_release(&buf);
return 0;
}
memoize common git-path "constant" files One of the most common uses of git_path() is to pass a constant, like git_path("MERGE_MSG"). This has two drawbacks: 1. The return value is a static buffer, and the lifetime is dependent on other calls to git_path, etc. 2. There's no compile-time checking of the pathname. This is OK for a one-off (after all, we have to spell it correctly at least once), but many of these constant strings appear throughout the code. This patch introduces a series of functions to "memoize" these strings, which are essentially globals for the lifetime of the program. We compute the value once, take ownership of the buffer, and return the cached value for subsequent calls. cache.h provides a helper macro for defining these functions as one-liners, and defines a few common ones for global use. Using a macro is a little bit gross, but it does nicely document the purpose of the functions. If we need to touch them all later (e.g., because we learned how to change the git_dir variable at runtime, and need to invalidate all of the stored values), it will be much easier to have the complete list. Note that the shared-global functions have separate, manual declarations. We could do something clever with the macros (e.g., expand it to a declaration in some places, and a declaration _and_ a definition in path.c). But there aren't that many, and it's probably better to stay away from too-magical macros. Likewise, if we abandon the C preprocessor in favor of generating these with a script, we could get much fancier. E.g., normalizing "FOO/BAR-BAZ" into "git_path_foo_bar_baz". But the small amount of saved typing is probably not worth the resulting confusion to readers who want to grep for the function's definition. Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2015-08-10 12:38:57 +03:00
if (!file_exists(git_path_opts_file()))
return 0;
/*
* The function git_parse_source(), called from git_config_from_file(),
* may die() in case of a syntactically incorrect file. We do not care
* about this case, though, because we wrote that file ourselves, so we
* are pretty certain that it is syntactically correct.
*/
if (git_config_from_file(populate_opts_cb, git_path_opts_file(), opts) < 0)
return error(_("malformed options sheet: '%s'"),
git_path_opts_file());
return 0;
}
sequencer: completely revamp the "todo" script parsing When we came up with the "sequencer" idea, we really wanted to have kind of a plumbing equivalent of the interactive rebase. Hence the choice of words: the "todo" script, a "pick", etc. However, when it came time to implement the entire shebang, somehow this idea got lost and the sequencer was used as working horse for cherry-pick and revert instead. So as not to interfere with the interactive rebase, it even uses a separate directory to store its state. Furthermore, it also is stupidly strict about the "todo" script it accepts: while it parses commands in a way that was *designed* to be similar to the interactive rebase, it then goes on to *error out* if the commands disagree with the overall action (cherry-pick or revert). Finally, the sequencer code chose to deviate from the interactive rebase code insofar that when it comes to writing the file with the remaining commands, it *reformats* the "todo" script instead of just writing the part of the parsed script that were not yet processed. This is not only unnecessary churn, but might well lose information that is valuable to the user (i.e. comments after the commands). Let's just bite the bullet and rewrite the entire parser; the code now becomes not only more elegant: it allows us to go on and teach the sequencer how to parse *true* "todo" scripts as used by the interactive rebase itself. In a way, the sequencer is about to grow up to do its older brother's job. Better. In particular, we choose to maintain the list of commands in an array instead of a linked list: this is flexible enough to allow us later on to even implement rebase -i's reordering of fixup!/squash! commits very easily (and with a very nice speed bonus, at least on Windows). While at it, do not stop at the first problem, but list *all* of the problems. This will help the user when the sequencer will do `rebase -i`'s work by allowing to address all issues in one go rather than going back and forth until the todo list is valid. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-10-21 15:24:41 +03:00
static int walk_revs_populate_todo(struct todo_list *todo_list,
struct replay_opts *opts)
{
sequencer: completely revamp the "todo" script parsing When we came up with the "sequencer" idea, we really wanted to have kind of a plumbing equivalent of the interactive rebase. Hence the choice of words: the "todo" script, a "pick", etc. However, when it came time to implement the entire shebang, somehow this idea got lost and the sequencer was used as working horse for cherry-pick and revert instead. So as not to interfere with the interactive rebase, it even uses a separate directory to store its state. Furthermore, it also is stupidly strict about the "todo" script it accepts: while it parses commands in a way that was *designed* to be similar to the interactive rebase, it then goes on to *error out* if the commands disagree with the overall action (cherry-pick or revert). Finally, the sequencer code chose to deviate from the interactive rebase code insofar that when it comes to writing the file with the remaining commands, it *reformats* the "todo" script instead of just writing the part of the parsed script that were not yet processed. This is not only unnecessary churn, but might well lose information that is valuable to the user (i.e. comments after the commands). Let's just bite the bullet and rewrite the entire parser; the code now becomes not only more elegant: it allows us to go on and teach the sequencer how to parse *true* "todo" scripts as used by the interactive rebase itself. In a way, the sequencer is about to grow up to do its older brother's job. Better. In particular, we choose to maintain the list of commands in an array instead of a linked list: this is flexible enough to allow us later on to even implement rebase -i's reordering of fixup!/squash! commits very easily (and with a very nice speed bonus, at least on Windows). While at it, do not stop at the first problem, but list *all* of the problems. This will help the user when the sequencer will do `rebase -i`'s work by allowing to address all issues in one go rather than going back and forth until the todo list is valid. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-10-21 15:24:41 +03:00
enum todo_command command = opts->action == REPLAY_PICK ?
TODO_PICK : TODO_REVERT;
const char *command_string = todo_command_strings[command];
struct commit *commit;
if (prepare_revs(opts))
return -1;
sequencer: completely revamp the "todo" script parsing When we came up with the "sequencer" idea, we really wanted to have kind of a plumbing equivalent of the interactive rebase. Hence the choice of words: the "todo" script, a "pick", etc. However, when it came time to implement the entire shebang, somehow this idea got lost and the sequencer was used as working horse for cherry-pick and revert instead. So as not to interfere with the interactive rebase, it even uses a separate directory to store its state. Furthermore, it also is stupidly strict about the "todo" script it accepts: while it parses commands in a way that was *designed* to be similar to the interactive rebase, it then goes on to *error out* if the commands disagree with the overall action (cherry-pick or revert). Finally, the sequencer code chose to deviate from the interactive rebase code insofar that when it comes to writing the file with the remaining commands, it *reformats* the "todo" script instead of just writing the part of the parsed script that were not yet processed. This is not only unnecessary churn, but might well lose information that is valuable to the user (i.e. comments after the commands). Let's just bite the bullet and rewrite the entire parser; the code now becomes not only more elegant: it allows us to go on and teach the sequencer how to parse *true* "todo" scripts as used by the interactive rebase itself. In a way, the sequencer is about to grow up to do its older brother's job. Better. In particular, we choose to maintain the list of commands in an array instead of a linked list: this is flexible enough to allow us later on to even implement rebase -i's reordering of fixup!/squash! commits very easily (and with a very nice speed bonus, at least on Windows). While at it, do not stop at the first problem, but list *all* of the problems. This will help the user when the sequencer will do `rebase -i`'s work by allowing to address all issues in one go rather than going back and forth until the todo list is valid. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-10-21 15:24:41 +03:00
while ((commit = get_revision(opts->revs))) {
struct todo_item *item = append_new_todo(todo_list);
const char *commit_buffer = get_commit_buffer(commit, NULL);
const char *subject;
int subject_len;
item->command = command;
item->commit = commit;
item->arg = NULL;
item->arg_len = 0;
sequencer: completely revamp the "todo" script parsing When we came up with the "sequencer" idea, we really wanted to have kind of a plumbing equivalent of the interactive rebase. Hence the choice of words: the "todo" script, a "pick", etc. However, when it came time to implement the entire shebang, somehow this idea got lost and the sequencer was used as working horse for cherry-pick and revert instead. So as not to interfere with the interactive rebase, it even uses a separate directory to store its state. Furthermore, it also is stupidly strict about the "todo" script it accepts: while it parses commands in a way that was *designed* to be similar to the interactive rebase, it then goes on to *error out* if the commands disagree with the overall action (cherry-pick or revert). Finally, the sequencer code chose to deviate from the interactive rebase code insofar that when it comes to writing the file with the remaining commands, it *reformats* the "todo" script instead of just writing the part of the parsed script that were not yet processed. This is not only unnecessary churn, but might well lose information that is valuable to the user (i.e. comments after the commands). Let's just bite the bullet and rewrite the entire parser; the code now becomes not only more elegant: it allows us to go on and teach the sequencer how to parse *true* "todo" scripts as used by the interactive rebase itself. In a way, the sequencer is about to grow up to do its older brother's job. Better. In particular, we choose to maintain the list of commands in an array instead of a linked list: this is flexible enough to allow us later on to even implement rebase -i's reordering of fixup!/squash! commits very easily (and with a very nice speed bonus, at least on Windows). While at it, do not stop at the first problem, but list *all* of the problems. This will help the user when the sequencer will do `rebase -i`'s work by allowing to address all issues in one go rather than going back and forth until the todo list is valid. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-10-21 15:24:41 +03:00
item->offset_in_buf = todo_list->buf.len;
subject_len = find_commit_subject(commit_buffer, &subject);
strbuf_addf(&todo_list->buf, "%s %s %.*s\n", command_string,
short_commit_name(commit), subject_len, subject);
unuse_commit_buffer(commit, commit_buffer);
}
return 0;
}
static int create_seq_dir(void)
{
memoize common git-path "constant" files One of the most common uses of git_path() is to pass a constant, like git_path("MERGE_MSG"). This has two drawbacks: 1. The return value is a static buffer, and the lifetime is dependent on other calls to git_path, etc. 2. There's no compile-time checking of the pathname. This is OK for a one-off (after all, we have to spell it correctly at least once), but many of these constant strings appear throughout the code. This patch introduces a series of functions to "memoize" these strings, which are essentially globals for the lifetime of the program. We compute the value once, take ownership of the buffer, and return the cached value for subsequent calls. cache.h provides a helper macro for defining these functions as one-liners, and defines a few common ones for global use. Using a macro is a little bit gross, but it does nicely document the purpose of the functions. If we need to touch them all later (e.g., because we learned how to change the git_dir variable at runtime, and need to invalidate all of the stored values), it will be much easier to have the complete list. Note that the shared-global functions have separate, manual declarations. We could do something clever with the macros (e.g., expand it to a declaration in some places, and a declaration _and_ a definition in path.c). But there aren't that many, and it's probably better to stay away from too-magical macros. Likewise, if we abandon the C preprocessor in favor of generating these with a script, we could get much fancier. E.g., normalizing "FOO/BAR-BAZ" into "git_path_foo_bar_baz". But the small amount of saved typing is probably not worth the resulting confusion to readers who want to grep for the function's definition. Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2015-08-10 12:38:57 +03:00
if (file_exists(git_path_seq_dir())) {
error(_("a cherry-pick or revert is already in progress"));
advise(_("try \"git cherry-pick (--continue | --quit | --abort)\""));
return -1;
} else if (mkdir(git_path_seq_dir(), 0777) < 0)
return error_errno(_("could not create sequencer directory '%s'"),
git_path_seq_dir());
return 0;
}
static int save_head(const char *head)
{
static struct lock_file head_lock;
struct strbuf buf = STRBUF_INIT;
int fd;
fd = hold_lock_file_for_update(&head_lock, git_path_head_file(), 0);
if (fd < 0) {
rollback_lock_file(&head_lock);
return error_errno(_("could not lock HEAD"));
}
strbuf_addf(&buf, "%s\n", head);
if (write_in_full(fd, buf.buf, buf.len) < 0) {
rollback_lock_file(&head_lock);
return error_errno(_("could not write to '%s'"),
git_path_head_file());
}
if (commit_lock_file(&head_lock) < 0) {
rollback_lock_file(&head_lock);
return error(_("failed to finalize '%s'."), git_path_head_file());
}
return 0;
}
static int rollback_is_safe(void)
{
struct strbuf sb = STRBUF_INIT;
struct object_id expected_head, actual_head;
if (strbuf_read_file(&sb, git_path_abort_safety_file(), 0) >= 0) {
strbuf_trim(&sb);
if (get_oid_hex(sb.buf, &expected_head)) {
strbuf_release(&sb);
die(_("could not parse %s"), git_path_abort_safety_file());
}
strbuf_release(&sb);
}
else if (errno == ENOENT)
oidclr(&expected_head);
else
die_errno(_("could not read '%s'"), git_path_abort_safety_file());
if (get_oid("HEAD", &actual_head))
oidclr(&actual_head);
return !oidcmp(&actual_head, &expected_head);
}
static int reset_for_rollback(const unsigned char *sha1)
{
const char *argv[4]; /* reset --merge <arg> + NULL */
argv[0] = "reset";
argv[1] = "--merge";
argv[2] = sha1_to_hex(sha1);
argv[3] = NULL;
return run_command_v_opt(argv, RUN_GIT_CMD);
}
static int rollback_single_pick(void)
{
unsigned char head_sha1[20];
memoize common git-path "constant" files One of the most common uses of git_path() is to pass a constant, like git_path("MERGE_MSG"). This has two drawbacks: 1. The return value is a static buffer, and the lifetime is dependent on other calls to git_path, etc. 2. There's no compile-time checking of the pathname. This is OK for a one-off (after all, we have to spell it correctly at least once), but many of these constant strings appear throughout the code. This patch introduces a series of functions to "memoize" these strings, which are essentially globals for the lifetime of the program. We compute the value once, take ownership of the buffer, and return the cached value for subsequent calls. cache.h provides a helper macro for defining these functions as one-liners, and defines a few common ones for global use. Using a macro is a little bit gross, but it does nicely document the purpose of the functions. If we need to touch them all later (e.g., because we learned how to change the git_dir variable at runtime, and need to invalidate all of the stored values), it will be much easier to have the complete list. Note that the shared-global functions have separate, manual declarations. We could do something clever with the macros (e.g., expand it to a declaration in some places, and a declaration _and_ a definition in path.c). But there aren't that many, and it's probably better to stay away from too-magical macros. Likewise, if we abandon the C preprocessor in favor of generating these with a script, we could get much fancier. E.g., normalizing "FOO/BAR-BAZ" into "git_path_foo_bar_baz". But the small amount of saved typing is probably not worth the resulting confusion to readers who want to grep for the function's definition. Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2015-08-10 12:38:57 +03:00
if (!file_exists(git_path_cherry_pick_head()) &&
!file_exists(git_path_revert_head()))
return error(_("no cherry-pick or revert in progress"));
if (read_ref_full("HEAD", 0, head_sha1, NULL))
return error(_("cannot resolve HEAD"));
if (is_null_sha1(head_sha1))
return error(_("cannot abort from a branch yet to be born"));
return reset_for_rollback(head_sha1);
}
int sequencer_rollback(struct replay_opts *opts)
{
FILE *f;
unsigned char sha1[20];
struct strbuf buf = STRBUF_INIT;
memoize common git-path "constant" files One of the most common uses of git_path() is to pass a constant, like git_path("MERGE_MSG"). This has two drawbacks: 1. The return value is a static buffer, and the lifetime is dependent on other calls to git_path, etc. 2. There's no compile-time checking of the pathname. This is OK for a one-off (after all, we have to spell it correctly at least once), but many of these constant strings appear throughout the code. This patch introduces a series of functions to "memoize" these strings, which are essentially globals for the lifetime of the program. We compute the value once, take ownership of the buffer, and return the cached value for subsequent calls. cache.h provides a helper macro for defining these functions as one-liners, and defines a few common ones for global use. Using a macro is a little bit gross, but it does nicely document the purpose of the functions. If we need to touch them all later (e.g., because we learned how to change the git_dir variable at runtime, and need to invalidate all of the stored values), it will be much easier to have the complete list. Note that the shared-global functions have separate, manual declarations. We could do something clever with the macros (e.g., expand it to a declaration in some places, and a declaration _and_ a definition in path.c). But there aren't that many, and it's probably better to stay away from too-magical macros. Likewise, if we abandon the C preprocessor in favor of generating these with a script, we could get much fancier. E.g., normalizing "FOO/BAR-BAZ" into "git_path_foo_bar_baz". But the small amount of saved typing is probably not worth the resulting confusion to readers who want to grep for the function's definition. Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2015-08-10 12:38:57 +03:00
f = fopen(git_path_head_file(), "r");
if (!f && errno == ENOENT) {
/*
* There is no multiple-cherry-pick in progress.
* If CHERRY_PICK_HEAD or REVERT_HEAD indicates
* a single-cherry-pick in progress, abort that.
*/
return rollback_single_pick();
}
if (!f)
return error_errno(_("cannot open '%s'"), git_path_head_file());
if (strbuf_getline_lf(&buf, f)) {
error(_("cannot read '%s': %s"), git_path_head_file(),
memoize common git-path "constant" files One of the most common uses of git_path() is to pass a constant, like git_path("MERGE_MSG"). This has two drawbacks: 1. The return value is a static buffer, and the lifetime is dependent on other calls to git_path, etc. 2. There's no compile-time checking of the pathname. This is OK for a one-off (after all, we have to spell it correctly at least once), but many of these constant strings appear throughout the code. This patch introduces a series of functions to "memoize" these strings, which are essentially globals for the lifetime of the program. We compute the value once, take ownership of the buffer, and return the cached value for subsequent calls. cache.h provides a helper macro for defining these functions as one-liners, and defines a few common ones for global use. Using a macro is a little bit gross, but it does nicely document the purpose of the functions. If we need to touch them all later (e.g., because we learned how to change the git_dir variable at runtime, and need to invalidate all of the stored values), it will be much easier to have the complete list. Note that the shared-global functions have separate, manual declarations. We could do something clever with the macros (e.g., expand it to a declaration in some places, and a declaration _and_ a definition in path.c). But there aren't that many, and it's probably better to stay away from too-magical macros. Likewise, if we abandon the C preprocessor in favor of generating these with a script, we could get much fancier. E.g., normalizing "FOO/BAR-BAZ" into "git_path_foo_bar_baz". But the small amount of saved typing is probably not worth the resulting confusion to readers who want to grep for the function's definition. Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2015-08-10 12:38:57 +03:00
ferror(f) ? strerror(errno) : _("unexpected end of file"));
fclose(f);
goto fail;
}
fclose(f);
if (get_sha1_hex(buf.buf, sha1) || buf.buf[40] != '\0') {
error(_("stored pre-cherry-pick HEAD file '%s' is corrupt"),
memoize common git-path "constant" files One of the most common uses of git_path() is to pass a constant, like git_path("MERGE_MSG"). This has two drawbacks: 1. The return value is a static buffer, and the lifetime is dependent on other calls to git_path, etc. 2. There's no compile-time checking of the pathname. This is OK for a one-off (after all, we have to spell it correctly at least once), but many of these constant strings appear throughout the code. This patch introduces a series of functions to "memoize" these strings, which are essentially globals for the lifetime of the program. We compute the value once, take ownership of the buffer, and return the cached value for subsequent calls. cache.h provides a helper macro for defining these functions as one-liners, and defines a few common ones for global use. Using a macro is a little bit gross, but it does nicely document the purpose of the functions. If we need to touch them all later (e.g., because we learned how to change the git_dir variable at runtime, and need to invalidate all of the stored values), it will be much easier to have the complete list. Note that the shared-global functions have separate, manual declarations. We could do something clever with the macros (e.g., expand it to a declaration in some places, and a declaration _and_ a definition in path.c). But there aren't that many, and it's probably better to stay away from too-magical macros. Likewise, if we abandon the C preprocessor in favor of generating these with a script, we could get much fancier. E.g., normalizing "FOO/BAR-BAZ" into "git_path_foo_bar_baz". But the small amount of saved typing is probably not worth the resulting confusion to readers who want to grep for the function's definition. Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2015-08-10 12:38:57 +03:00
git_path_head_file());
goto fail;
}
if (is_null_sha1(sha1)) {
error(_("cannot abort from a branch yet to be born"));
goto fail;
}
if (!rollback_is_safe()) {
/* Do not error, just do not rollback */
warning(_("You seem to have moved HEAD. "
"Not rewinding, check your HEAD!"));
} else
if (reset_for_rollback(sha1))
goto fail;
strbuf_release(&buf);
return sequencer_remove_state(opts);
fail:
strbuf_release(&buf);
return -1;
}
sequencer: completely revamp the "todo" script parsing When we came up with the "sequencer" idea, we really wanted to have kind of a plumbing equivalent of the interactive rebase. Hence the choice of words: the "todo" script, a "pick", etc. However, when it came time to implement the entire shebang, somehow this idea got lost and the sequencer was used as working horse for cherry-pick and revert instead. So as not to interfere with the interactive rebase, it even uses a separate directory to store its state. Furthermore, it also is stupidly strict about the "todo" script it accepts: while it parses commands in a way that was *designed* to be similar to the interactive rebase, it then goes on to *error out* if the commands disagree with the overall action (cherry-pick or revert). Finally, the sequencer code chose to deviate from the interactive rebase code insofar that when it comes to writing the file with the remaining commands, it *reformats* the "todo" script instead of just writing the part of the parsed script that were not yet processed. This is not only unnecessary churn, but might well lose information that is valuable to the user (i.e. comments after the commands). Let's just bite the bullet and rewrite the entire parser; the code now becomes not only more elegant: it allows us to go on and teach the sequencer how to parse *true* "todo" scripts as used by the interactive rebase itself. In a way, the sequencer is about to grow up to do its older brother's job. Better. In particular, we choose to maintain the list of commands in an array instead of a linked list: this is flexible enough to allow us later on to even implement rebase -i's reordering of fixup!/squash! commits very easily (and with a very nice speed bonus, at least on Windows). While at it, do not stop at the first problem, but list *all* of the problems. This will help the user when the sequencer will do `rebase -i`'s work by allowing to address all issues in one go rather than going back and forth until the todo list is valid. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-10-21 15:24:41 +03:00
static int save_todo(struct todo_list *todo_list, struct replay_opts *opts)
{
static struct lock_file todo_lock;
sequencer: completely revamp the "todo" script parsing When we came up with the "sequencer" idea, we really wanted to have kind of a plumbing equivalent of the interactive rebase. Hence the choice of words: the "todo" script, a "pick", etc. However, when it came time to implement the entire shebang, somehow this idea got lost and the sequencer was used as working horse for cherry-pick and revert instead. So as not to interfere with the interactive rebase, it even uses a separate directory to store its state. Furthermore, it also is stupidly strict about the "todo" script it accepts: while it parses commands in a way that was *designed* to be similar to the interactive rebase, it then goes on to *error out* if the commands disagree with the overall action (cherry-pick or revert). Finally, the sequencer code chose to deviate from the interactive rebase code insofar that when it comes to writing the file with the remaining commands, it *reformats* the "todo" script instead of just writing the part of the parsed script that were not yet processed. This is not only unnecessary churn, but might well lose information that is valuable to the user (i.e. comments after the commands). Let's just bite the bullet and rewrite the entire parser; the code now becomes not only more elegant: it allows us to go on and teach the sequencer how to parse *true* "todo" scripts as used by the interactive rebase itself. In a way, the sequencer is about to grow up to do its older brother's job. Better. In particular, we choose to maintain the list of commands in an array instead of a linked list: this is flexible enough to allow us later on to even implement rebase -i's reordering of fixup!/squash! commits very easily (and with a very nice speed bonus, at least on Windows). While at it, do not stop at the first problem, but list *all* of the problems. This will help the user when the sequencer will do `rebase -i`'s work by allowing to address all issues in one go rather than going back and forth until the todo list is valid. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-10-21 15:24:41 +03:00
const char *todo_path = get_todo_path(opts);
int next = todo_list->current, offset, fd;
/*
* rebase -i writes "git-rebase-todo" without the currently executing
* command, appending it to "done" instead.
*/
if (is_rebase_i(opts))
next++;
sequencer: completely revamp the "todo" script parsing When we came up with the "sequencer" idea, we really wanted to have kind of a plumbing equivalent of the interactive rebase. Hence the choice of words: the "todo" script, a "pick", etc. However, when it came time to implement the entire shebang, somehow this idea got lost and the sequencer was used as working horse for cherry-pick and revert instead. So as not to interfere with the interactive rebase, it even uses a separate directory to store its state. Furthermore, it also is stupidly strict about the "todo" script it accepts: while it parses commands in a way that was *designed* to be similar to the interactive rebase, it then goes on to *error out* if the commands disagree with the overall action (cherry-pick or revert). Finally, the sequencer code chose to deviate from the interactive rebase code insofar that when it comes to writing the file with the remaining commands, it *reformats* the "todo" script instead of just writing the part of the parsed script that were not yet processed. This is not only unnecessary churn, but might well lose information that is valuable to the user (i.e. comments after the commands). Let's just bite the bullet and rewrite the entire parser; the code now becomes not only more elegant: it allows us to go on and teach the sequencer how to parse *true* "todo" scripts as used by the interactive rebase itself. In a way, the sequencer is about to grow up to do its older brother's job. Better. In particular, we choose to maintain the list of commands in an array instead of a linked list: this is flexible enough to allow us later on to even implement rebase -i's reordering of fixup!/squash! commits very easily (and with a very nice speed bonus, at least on Windows). While at it, do not stop at the first problem, but list *all* of the problems. This will help the user when the sequencer will do `rebase -i`'s work by allowing to address all issues in one go rather than going back and forth until the todo list is valid. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-10-21 15:24:41 +03:00
fd = hold_lock_file_for_update(&todo_lock, todo_path, 0);
if (fd < 0)
return error_errno(_("could not lock '%s'"), todo_path);
sequencer: completely revamp the "todo" script parsing When we came up with the "sequencer" idea, we really wanted to have kind of a plumbing equivalent of the interactive rebase. Hence the choice of words: the "todo" script, a "pick", etc. However, when it came time to implement the entire shebang, somehow this idea got lost and the sequencer was used as working horse for cherry-pick and revert instead. So as not to interfere with the interactive rebase, it even uses a separate directory to store its state. Furthermore, it also is stupidly strict about the "todo" script it accepts: while it parses commands in a way that was *designed* to be similar to the interactive rebase, it then goes on to *error out* if the commands disagree with the overall action (cherry-pick or revert). Finally, the sequencer code chose to deviate from the interactive rebase code insofar that when it comes to writing the file with the remaining commands, it *reformats* the "todo" script instead of just writing the part of the parsed script that were not yet processed. This is not only unnecessary churn, but might well lose information that is valuable to the user (i.e. comments after the commands). Let's just bite the bullet and rewrite the entire parser; the code now becomes not only more elegant: it allows us to go on and teach the sequencer how to parse *true* "todo" scripts as used by the interactive rebase itself. In a way, the sequencer is about to grow up to do its older brother's job. Better. In particular, we choose to maintain the list of commands in an array instead of a linked list: this is flexible enough to allow us later on to even implement rebase -i's reordering of fixup!/squash! commits very easily (and with a very nice speed bonus, at least on Windows). While at it, do not stop at the first problem, but list *all* of the problems. This will help the user when the sequencer will do `rebase -i`'s work by allowing to address all issues in one go rather than going back and forth until the todo list is valid. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-10-21 15:24:41 +03:00
offset = next < todo_list->nr ?
todo_list->items[next].offset_in_buf : todo_list->buf.len;
if (write_in_full(fd, todo_list->buf.buf + offset,
todo_list->buf.len - offset) < 0)
return error_errno(_("could not write to '%s'"), todo_path);
sequencer: completely revamp the "todo" script parsing When we came up with the "sequencer" idea, we really wanted to have kind of a plumbing equivalent of the interactive rebase. Hence the choice of words: the "todo" script, a "pick", etc. However, when it came time to implement the entire shebang, somehow this idea got lost and the sequencer was used as working horse for cherry-pick and revert instead. So as not to interfere with the interactive rebase, it even uses a separate directory to store its state. Furthermore, it also is stupidly strict about the "todo" script it accepts: while it parses commands in a way that was *designed* to be similar to the interactive rebase, it then goes on to *error out* if the commands disagree with the overall action (cherry-pick or revert). Finally, the sequencer code chose to deviate from the interactive rebase code insofar that when it comes to writing the file with the remaining commands, it *reformats* the "todo" script instead of just writing the part of the parsed script that were not yet processed. This is not only unnecessary churn, but might well lose information that is valuable to the user (i.e. comments after the commands). Let's just bite the bullet and rewrite the entire parser; the code now becomes not only more elegant: it allows us to go on and teach the sequencer how to parse *true* "todo" scripts as used by the interactive rebase itself. In a way, the sequencer is about to grow up to do its older brother's job. Better. In particular, we choose to maintain the list of commands in an array instead of a linked list: this is flexible enough to allow us later on to even implement rebase -i's reordering of fixup!/squash! commits very easily (and with a very nice speed bonus, at least on Windows). While at it, do not stop at the first problem, but list *all* of the problems. This will help the user when the sequencer will do `rebase -i`'s work by allowing to address all issues in one go rather than going back and forth until the todo list is valid. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-10-21 15:24:41 +03:00
if (commit_lock_file(&todo_lock) < 0)
return error(_("failed to finalize '%s'."), todo_path);
return 0;
}
static int save_opts(struct replay_opts *opts)
{
memoize common git-path "constant" files One of the most common uses of git_path() is to pass a constant, like git_path("MERGE_MSG"). This has two drawbacks: 1. The return value is a static buffer, and the lifetime is dependent on other calls to git_path, etc. 2. There's no compile-time checking of the pathname. This is OK for a one-off (after all, we have to spell it correctly at least once), but many of these constant strings appear throughout the code. This patch introduces a series of functions to "memoize" these strings, which are essentially globals for the lifetime of the program. We compute the value once, take ownership of the buffer, and return the cached value for subsequent calls. cache.h provides a helper macro for defining these functions as one-liners, and defines a few common ones for global use. Using a macro is a little bit gross, but it does nicely document the purpose of the functions. If we need to touch them all later (e.g., because we learned how to change the git_dir variable at runtime, and need to invalidate all of the stored values), it will be much easier to have the complete list. Note that the shared-global functions have separate, manual declarations. We could do something clever with the macros (e.g., expand it to a declaration in some places, and a declaration _and_ a definition in path.c). But there aren't that many, and it's probably better to stay away from too-magical macros. Likewise, if we abandon the C preprocessor in favor of generating these with a script, we could get much fancier. E.g., normalizing "FOO/BAR-BAZ" into "git_path_foo_bar_baz". But the small amount of saved typing is probably not worth the resulting confusion to readers who want to grep for the function's definition. Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2015-08-10 12:38:57 +03:00
const char *opts_file = git_path_opts_file();
int res = 0;
if (opts->no_commit)
res |= git_config_set_in_file_gently(opts_file, "options.no-commit", "true");
if (opts->edit)
res |= git_config_set_in_file_gently(opts_file, "options.edit", "true");
if (opts->signoff)
res |= git_config_set_in_file_gently(opts_file, "options.signoff", "true");
if (opts->record_origin)
res |= git_config_set_in_file_gently(opts_file, "options.record-origin", "true");
if (opts->allow_ff)
res |= git_config_set_in_file_gently(opts_file, "options.allow-ff", "true");
if (opts->mainline) {
struct strbuf buf = STRBUF_INIT;
strbuf_addf(&buf, "%d", opts->mainline);
res |= git_config_set_in_file_gently(opts_file, "options.mainline", buf.buf);
strbuf_release(&buf);
}
if (opts->strategy)
res |= git_config_set_in_file_gently(opts_file, "options.strategy", opts->strategy);
if (opts->gpg_sign)
res |= git_config_set_in_file_gently(opts_file, "options.gpg-sign", opts->gpg_sign);
if (opts->xopts) {
int i;
for (i = 0; i < opts->xopts_nr; i++)
res |= git_config_set_multivar_in_file_gently(opts_file,
"options.strategy-option",
opts->xopts[i], "^$", 0);
}
return res;
}
static int make_patch(struct commit *commit, struct replay_opts *opts)
{
struct strbuf buf = STRBUF_INIT;
struct rev_info log_tree_opt;
const char *subject, *p;
int res = 0;
p = short_commit_name(commit);
if (write_message(p, strlen(p), rebase_path_stopped_sha(), 1) < 0)
return -1;
strbuf_addf(&buf, "%s/patch", get_dir(opts));
memset(&log_tree_opt, 0, sizeof(log_tree_opt));
init_revisions(&log_tree_opt, NULL);
log_tree_opt.abbrev = 0;
log_tree_opt.diff = 1;
log_tree_opt.diffopt.output_format = DIFF_FORMAT_PATCH;
log_tree_opt.disable_stdin = 1;
log_tree_opt.no_commit_id = 1;
log_tree_opt.diffopt.file = fopen(buf.buf, "w");
log_tree_opt.diffopt.use_color = GIT_COLOR_NEVER;
if (!log_tree_opt.diffopt.file)
res |= error_errno(_("could not open '%s'"), buf.buf);
else {
res |= log_tree_commit(&log_tree_opt, commit);
fclose(log_tree_opt.diffopt.file);
}
strbuf_reset(&buf);
strbuf_addf(&buf, "%s/message", get_dir(opts));
if (!file_exists(buf.buf)) {
const char *commit_buffer = get_commit_buffer(commit, NULL);
find_commit_subject(commit_buffer, &subject);
res |= write_message(subject, strlen(subject), buf.buf, 1);
unuse_commit_buffer(commit, commit_buffer);
}
strbuf_release(&buf);
return res;
}
static int intend_to_amend(void)
{
unsigned char head[20];
char *p;
if (get_sha1("HEAD", head))
return error(_("cannot read HEAD"));
p = sha1_to_hex(head);
return write_message(p, strlen(p), rebase_path_amend(), 1);
}
static int error_with_patch(struct commit *commit,
const char *subject, int subject_len,
struct replay_opts *opts, int exit_code, int to_amend)
{
if (make_patch(commit, opts))
return -1;
if (to_amend) {
if (intend_to_amend())
return -1;
fprintf(stderr, "You can amend the commit now, with\n"
"\n"
" git commit --amend %s\n"
"\n"
"Once you are satisfied with your changes, run\n"
"\n"
" git rebase --continue\n", gpg_sign_opt_quoted(opts));
} else if (exit_code)
fprintf(stderr, "Could not apply %s... %.*s\n",
short_commit_name(commit), subject_len, subject);
return exit_code;
}
sequencer: completely revamp the "todo" script parsing When we came up with the "sequencer" idea, we really wanted to have kind of a plumbing equivalent of the interactive rebase. Hence the choice of words: the "todo" script, a "pick", etc. However, when it came time to implement the entire shebang, somehow this idea got lost and the sequencer was used as working horse for cherry-pick and revert instead. So as not to interfere with the interactive rebase, it even uses a separate directory to store its state. Furthermore, it also is stupidly strict about the "todo" script it accepts: while it parses commands in a way that was *designed* to be similar to the interactive rebase, it then goes on to *error out* if the commands disagree with the overall action (cherry-pick or revert). Finally, the sequencer code chose to deviate from the interactive rebase code insofar that when it comes to writing the file with the remaining commands, it *reformats* the "todo" script instead of just writing the part of the parsed script that were not yet processed. This is not only unnecessary churn, but might well lose information that is valuable to the user (i.e. comments after the commands). Let's just bite the bullet and rewrite the entire parser; the code now becomes not only more elegant: it allows us to go on and teach the sequencer how to parse *true* "todo" scripts as used by the interactive rebase itself. In a way, the sequencer is about to grow up to do its older brother's job. Better. In particular, we choose to maintain the list of commands in an array instead of a linked list: this is flexible enough to allow us later on to even implement rebase -i's reordering of fixup!/squash! commits very easily (and with a very nice speed bonus, at least on Windows). While at it, do not stop at the first problem, but list *all* of the problems. This will help the user when the sequencer will do `rebase -i`'s work by allowing to address all issues in one go rather than going back and forth until the todo list is valid. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-10-21 15:24:41 +03:00
static int pick_commits(struct todo_list *todo_list, struct replay_opts *opts)
{
int res = 0;
setenv(GIT_REFLOG_ACTION, action_name(opts), 0);
if (opts->allow_ff)
assert(!(opts->signoff || opts->no_commit ||
opts->record_origin || opts->edit));
if (read_and_refresh_cache(opts))
return -1;
sequencer: completely revamp the "todo" script parsing When we came up with the "sequencer" idea, we really wanted to have kind of a plumbing equivalent of the interactive rebase. Hence the choice of words: the "todo" script, a "pick", etc. However, when it came time to implement the entire shebang, somehow this idea got lost and the sequencer was used as working horse for cherry-pick and revert instead. So as not to interfere with the interactive rebase, it even uses a separate directory to store its state. Furthermore, it also is stupidly strict about the "todo" script it accepts: while it parses commands in a way that was *designed* to be similar to the interactive rebase, it then goes on to *error out* if the commands disagree with the overall action (cherry-pick or revert). Finally, the sequencer code chose to deviate from the interactive rebase code insofar that when it comes to writing the file with the remaining commands, it *reformats* the "todo" script instead of just writing the part of the parsed script that were not yet processed. This is not only unnecessary churn, but might well lose information that is valuable to the user (i.e. comments after the commands). Let's just bite the bullet and rewrite the entire parser; the code now becomes not only more elegant: it allows us to go on and teach the sequencer how to parse *true* "todo" scripts as used by the interactive rebase itself. In a way, the sequencer is about to grow up to do its older brother's job. Better. In particular, we choose to maintain the list of commands in an array instead of a linked list: this is flexible enough to allow us later on to even implement rebase -i's reordering of fixup!/squash! commits very easily (and with a very nice speed bonus, at least on Windows). While at it, do not stop at the first problem, but list *all* of the problems. This will help the user when the sequencer will do `rebase -i`'s work by allowing to address all issues in one go rather than going back and forth until the todo list is valid. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-10-21 15:24:41 +03:00
while (todo_list->current < todo_list->nr) {
struct todo_item *item = todo_list->items + todo_list->current;
if (save_todo(todo_list, opts))
return -1;
if (item->command <= TODO_EDIT) {
res = do_pick_commit(item->command, item->commit,
opts);
if (item->command == TODO_EDIT) {
struct commit *commit = item->commit;
if (!res)
warning(_("stopped at %s... %.*s"),
short_commit_name(commit),
item->arg_len, item->arg);
return error_with_patch(commit,
item->arg, item->arg_len, opts, res,
!res);
}
} else if (!is_noop(item->command))
return error(_("unknown command %d"), item->command);
sequencer: completely revamp the "todo" script parsing When we came up with the "sequencer" idea, we really wanted to have kind of a plumbing equivalent of the interactive rebase. Hence the choice of words: the "todo" script, a "pick", etc. However, when it came time to implement the entire shebang, somehow this idea got lost and the sequencer was used as working horse for cherry-pick and revert instead. So as not to interfere with the interactive rebase, it even uses a separate directory to store its state. Furthermore, it also is stupidly strict about the "todo" script it accepts: while it parses commands in a way that was *designed* to be similar to the interactive rebase, it then goes on to *error out* if the commands disagree with the overall action (cherry-pick or revert). Finally, the sequencer code chose to deviate from the interactive rebase code insofar that when it comes to writing the file with the remaining commands, it *reformats* the "todo" script instead of just writing the part of the parsed script that were not yet processed. This is not only unnecessary churn, but might well lose information that is valuable to the user (i.e. comments after the commands). Let's just bite the bullet and rewrite the entire parser; the code now becomes not only more elegant: it allows us to go on and teach the sequencer how to parse *true* "todo" scripts as used by the interactive rebase itself. In a way, the sequencer is about to grow up to do its older brother's job. Better. In particular, we choose to maintain the list of commands in an array instead of a linked list: this is flexible enough to allow us later on to even implement rebase -i's reordering of fixup!/squash! commits very easily (and with a very nice speed bonus, at least on Windows). While at it, do not stop at the first problem, but list *all* of the problems. This will help the user when the sequencer will do `rebase -i`'s work by allowing to address all issues in one go rather than going back and forth until the todo list is valid. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-10-21 15:24:41 +03:00
todo_list->current++;
if (res)
return res;
}
if (is_rebase_i(opts)) {
/* Stopped in the middle, as planned? */
if (todo_list->current < todo_list->nr)
return 0;
}
/*
* Sequence of picks finished successfully; cleanup by
* removing the .git/sequencer directory
*/
return sequencer_remove_state(opts);
}
static int continue_single_pick(void)
{
const char *argv[] = { "commit", NULL };
memoize common git-path "constant" files One of the most common uses of git_path() is to pass a constant, like git_path("MERGE_MSG"). This has two drawbacks: 1. The return value is a static buffer, and the lifetime is dependent on other calls to git_path, etc. 2. There's no compile-time checking of the pathname. This is OK for a one-off (after all, we have to spell it correctly at least once), but many of these constant strings appear throughout the code. This patch introduces a series of functions to "memoize" these strings, which are essentially globals for the lifetime of the program. We compute the value once, take ownership of the buffer, and return the cached value for subsequent calls. cache.h provides a helper macro for defining these functions as one-liners, and defines a few common ones for global use. Using a macro is a little bit gross, but it does nicely document the purpose of the functions. If we need to touch them all later (e.g., because we learned how to change the git_dir variable at runtime, and need to invalidate all of the stored values), it will be much easier to have the complete list. Note that the shared-global functions have separate, manual declarations. We could do something clever with the macros (e.g., expand it to a declaration in some places, and a declaration _and_ a definition in path.c). But there aren't that many, and it's probably better to stay away from too-magical macros. Likewise, if we abandon the C preprocessor in favor of generating these with a script, we could get much fancier. E.g., normalizing "FOO/BAR-BAZ" into "git_path_foo_bar_baz". But the small amount of saved typing is probably not worth the resulting confusion to readers who want to grep for the function's definition. Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2015-08-10 12:38:57 +03:00
if (!file_exists(git_path_cherry_pick_head()) &&
!file_exists(git_path_revert_head()))
return error(_("no cherry-pick or revert in progress"));
return run_command_v_opt(argv, RUN_GIT_CMD);
}
int sequencer_continue(struct replay_opts *opts)
{
sequencer: completely revamp the "todo" script parsing When we came up with the "sequencer" idea, we really wanted to have kind of a plumbing equivalent of the interactive rebase. Hence the choice of words: the "todo" script, a "pick", etc. However, when it came time to implement the entire shebang, somehow this idea got lost and the sequencer was used as working horse for cherry-pick and revert instead. So as not to interfere with the interactive rebase, it even uses a separate directory to store its state. Furthermore, it also is stupidly strict about the "todo" script it accepts: while it parses commands in a way that was *designed* to be similar to the interactive rebase, it then goes on to *error out* if the commands disagree with the overall action (cherry-pick or revert). Finally, the sequencer code chose to deviate from the interactive rebase code insofar that when it comes to writing the file with the remaining commands, it *reformats* the "todo" script instead of just writing the part of the parsed script that were not yet processed. This is not only unnecessary churn, but might well lose information that is valuable to the user (i.e. comments after the commands). Let's just bite the bullet and rewrite the entire parser; the code now becomes not only more elegant: it allows us to go on and teach the sequencer how to parse *true* "todo" scripts as used by the interactive rebase itself. In a way, the sequencer is about to grow up to do its older brother's job. Better. In particular, we choose to maintain the list of commands in an array instead of a linked list: this is flexible enough to allow us later on to even implement rebase -i's reordering of fixup!/squash! commits very easily (and with a very nice speed bonus, at least on Windows). While at it, do not stop at the first problem, but list *all* of the problems. This will help the user when the sequencer will do `rebase -i`'s work by allowing to address all issues in one go rather than going back and forth until the todo list is valid. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-10-21 15:24:41 +03:00
struct todo_list todo_list = TODO_LIST_INIT;
int res;
if (read_and_refresh_cache(opts))
return -1;
if (!file_exists(get_todo_path(opts)))
return continue_single_pick();
sequencer: completely revamp the "todo" script parsing When we came up with the "sequencer" idea, we really wanted to have kind of a plumbing equivalent of the interactive rebase. Hence the choice of words: the "todo" script, a "pick", etc. However, when it came time to implement the entire shebang, somehow this idea got lost and the sequencer was used as working horse for cherry-pick and revert instead. So as not to interfere with the interactive rebase, it even uses a separate directory to store its state. Furthermore, it also is stupidly strict about the "todo" script it accepts: while it parses commands in a way that was *designed* to be similar to the interactive rebase, it then goes on to *error out* if the commands disagree with the overall action (cherry-pick or revert). Finally, the sequencer code chose to deviate from the interactive rebase code insofar that when it comes to writing the file with the remaining commands, it *reformats* the "todo" script instead of just writing the part of the parsed script that were not yet processed. This is not only unnecessary churn, but might well lose information that is valuable to the user (i.e. comments after the commands). Let's just bite the bullet and rewrite the entire parser; the code now becomes not only more elegant: it allows us to go on and teach the sequencer how to parse *true* "todo" scripts as used by the interactive rebase itself. In a way, the sequencer is about to grow up to do its older brother's job. Better. In particular, we choose to maintain the list of commands in an array instead of a linked list: this is flexible enough to allow us later on to even implement rebase -i's reordering of fixup!/squash! commits very easily (and with a very nice speed bonus, at least on Windows). While at it, do not stop at the first problem, but list *all* of the problems. This will help the user when the sequencer will do `rebase -i`'s work by allowing to address all issues in one go rather than going back and forth until the todo list is valid. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-10-21 15:24:41 +03:00
if (read_populate_opts(opts))
return -1;
sequencer: completely revamp the "todo" script parsing When we came up with the "sequencer" idea, we really wanted to have kind of a plumbing equivalent of the interactive rebase. Hence the choice of words: the "todo" script, a "pick", etc. However, when it came time to implement the entire shebang, somehow this idea got lost and the sequencer was used as working horse for cherry-pick and revert instead. So as not to interfere with the interactive rebase, it even uses a separate directory to store its state. Furthermore, it also is stupidly strict about the "todo" script it accepts: while it parses commands in a way that was *designed* to be similar to the interactive rebase, it then goes on to *error out* if the commands disagree with the overall action (cherry-pick or revert). Finally, the sequencer code chose to deviate from the interactive rebase code insofar that when it comes to writing the file with the remaining commands, it *reformats* the "todo" script instead of just writing the part of the parsed script that were not yet processed. This is not only unnecessary churn, but might well lose information that is valuable to the user (i.e. comments after the commands). Let's just bite the bullet and rewrite the entire parser; the code now becomes not only more elegant: it allows us to go on and teach the sequencer how to parse *true* "todo" scripts as used by the interactive rebase itself. In a way, the sequencer is about to grow up to do its older brother's job. Better. In particular, we choose to maintain the list of commands in an array instead of a linked list: this is flexible enough to allow us later on to even implement rebase -i's reordering of fixup!/squash! commits very easily (and with a very nice speed bonus, at least on Windows). While at it, do not stop at the first problem, but list *all* of the problems. This will help the user when the sequencer will do `rebase -i`'s work by allowing to address all issues in one go rather than going back and forth until the todo list is valid. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-10-21 15:24:41 +03:00
if ((res = read_populate_todo(&todo_list, opts)))
goto release_todo_list;
/* Verify that the conflict has been resolved */
memoize common git-path "constant" files One of the most common uses of git_path() is to pass a constant, like git_path("MERGE_MSG"). This has two drawbacks: 1. The return value is a static buffer, and the lifetime is dependent on other calls to git_path, etc. 2. There's no compile-time checking of the pathname. This is OK for a one-off (after all, we have to spell it correctly at least once), but many of these constant strings appear throughout the code. This patch introduces a series of functions to "memoize" these strings, which are essentially globals for the lifetime of the program. We compute the value once, take ownership of the buffer, and return the cached value for subsequent calls. cache.h provides a helper macro for defining these functions as one-liners, and defines a few common ones for global use. Using a macro is a little bit gross, but it does nicely document the purpose of the functions. If we need to touch them all later (e.g., because we learned how to change the git_dir variable at runtime, and need to invalidate all of the stored values), it will be much easier to have the complete list. Note that the shared-global functions have separate, manual declarations. We could do something clever with the macros (e.g., expand it to a declaration in some places, and a declaration _and_ a definition in path.c). But there aren't that many, and it's probably better to stay away from too-magical macros. Likewise, if we abandon the C preprocessor in favor of generating these with a script, we could get much fancier. E.g., normalizing "FOO/BAR-BAZ" into "git_path_foo_bar_baz". But the small amount of saved typing is probably not worth the resulting confusion to readers who want to grep for the function's definition. Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2015-08-10 12:38:57 +03:00
if (file_exists(git_path_cherry_pick_head()) ||
file_exists(git_path_revert_head())) {
sequencer: completely revamp the "todo" script parsing When we came up with the "sequencer" idea, we really wanted to have kind of a plumbing equivalent of the interactive rebase. Hence the choice of words: the "todo" script, a "pick", etc. However, when it came time to implement the entire shebang, somehow this idea got lost and the sequencer was used as working horse for cherry-pick and revert instead. So as not to interfere with the interactive rebase, it even uses a separate directory to store its state. Furthermore, it also is stupidly strict about the "todo" script it accepts: while it parses commands in a way that was *designed* to be similar to the interactive rebase, it then goes on to *error out* if the commands disagree with the overall action (cherry-pick or revert). Finally, the sequencer code chose to deviate from the interactive rebase code insofar that when it comes to writing the file with the remaining commands, it *reformats* the "todo" script instead of just writing the part of the parsed script that were not yet processed. This is not only unnecessary churn, but might well lose information that is valuable to the user (i.e. comments after the commands). Let's just bite the bullet and rewrite the entire parser; the code now becomes not only more elegant: it allows us to go on and teach the sequencer how to parse *true* "todo" scripts as used by the interactive rebase itself. In a way, the sequencer is about to grow up to do its older brother's job. Better. In particular, we choose to maintain the list of commands in an array instead of a linked list: this is flexible enough to allow us later on to even implement rebase -i's reordering of fixup!/squash! commits very easily (and with a very nice speed bonus, at least on Windows). While at it, do not stop at the first problem, but list *all* of the problems. This will help the user when the sequencer will do `rebase -i`'s work by allowing to address all issues in one go rather than going back and forth until the todo list is valid. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-10-21 15:24:41 +03:00
res = continue_single_pick();
if (res)
goto release_todo_list;
}
if (index_differs_from("HEAD", 0, 0)) {
sequencer: completely revamp the "todo" script parsing When we came up with the "sequencer" idea, we really wanted to have kind of a plumbing equivalent of the interactive rebase. Hence the choice of words: the "todo" script, a "pick", etc. However, when it came time to implement the entire shebang, somehow this idea got lost and the sequencer was used as working horse for cherry-pick and revert instead. So as not to interfere with the interactive rebase, it even uses a separate directory to store its state. Furthermore, it also is stupidly strict about the "todo" script it accepts: while it parses commands in a way that was *designed* to be similar to the interactive rebase, it then goes on to *error out* if the commands disagree with the overall action (cherry-pick or revert). Finally, the sequencer code chose to deviate from the interactive rebase code insofar that when it comes to writing the file with the remaining commands, it *reformats* the "todo" script instead of just writing the part of the parsed script that were not yet processed. This is not only unnecessary churn, but might well lose information that is valuable to the user (i.e. comments after the commands). Let's just bite the bullet and rewrite the entire parser; the code now becomes not only more elegant: it allows us to go on and teach the sequencer how to parse *true* "todo" scripts as used by the interactive rebase itself. In a way, the sequencer is about to grow up to do its older brother's job. Better. In particular, we choose to maintain the list of commands in an array instead of a linked list: this is flexible enough to allow us later on to even implement rebase -i's reordering of fixup!/squash! commits very easily (and with a very nice speed bonus, at least on Windows). While at it, do not stop at the first problem, but list *all* of the problems. This will help the user when the sequencer will do `rebase -i`'s work by allowing to address all issues in one go rather than going back and forth until the todo list is valid. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-10-21 15:24:41 +03:00
res = error_dirty_index(opts);
goto release_todo_list;
}
todo_list.current++;
res = pick_commits(&todo_list, opts);
release_todo_list:
todo_list_release(&todo_list);
return res;
}
static int single_pick(struct commit *cmit, struct replay_opts *opts)
{
setenv(GIT_REFLOG_ACTION, action_name(opts), 0);
sequencer: completely revamp the "todo" script parsing When we came up with the "sequencer" idea, we really wanted to have kind of a plumbing equivalent of the interactive rebase. Hence the choice of words: the "todo" script, a "pick", etc. However, when it came time to implement the entire shebang, somehow this idea got lost and the sequencer was used as working horse for cherry-pick and revert instead. So as not to interfere with the interactive rebase, it even uses a separate directory to store its state. Furthermore, it also is stupidly strict about the "todo" script it accepts: while it parses commands in a way that was *designed* to be similar to the interactive rebase, it then goes on to *error out* if the commands disagree with the overall action (cherry-pick or revert). Finally, the sequencer code chose to deviate from the interactive rebase code insofar that when it comes to writing the file with the remaining commands, it *reformats* the "todo" script instead of just writing the part of the parsed script that were not yet processed. This is not only unnecessary churn, but might well lose information that is valuable to the user (i.e. comments after the commands). Let's just bite the bullet and rewrite the entire parser; the code now becomes not only more elegant: it allows us to go on and teach the sequencer how to parse *true* "todo" scripts as used by the interactive rebase itself. In a way, the sequencer is about to grow up to do its older brother's job. Better. In particular, we choose to maintain the list of commands in an array instead of a linked list: this is flexible enough to allow us later on to even implement rebase -i's reordering of fixup!/squash! commits very easily (and with a very nice speed bonus, at least on Windows). While at it, do not stop at the first problem, but list *all* of the problems. This will help the user when the sequencer will do `rebase -i`'s work by allowing to address all issues in one go rather than going back and forth until the todo list is valid. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-10-21 15:24:41 +03:00
return do_pick_commit(opts->action == REPLAY_PICK ?
TODO_PICK : TODO_REVERT, cmit, opts);
}
int sequencer_pick_revisions(struct replay_opts *opts)
{
sequencer: completely revamp the "todo" script parsing When we came up with the "sequencer" idea, we really wanted to have kind of a plumbing equivalent of the interactive rebase. Hence the choice of words: the "todo" script, a "pick", etc. However, when it came time to implement the entire shebang, somehow this idea got lost and the sequencer was used as working horse for cherry-pick and revert instead. So as not to interfere with the interactive rebase, it even uses a separate directory to store its state. Furthermore, it also is stupidly strict about the "todo" script it accepts: while it parses commands in a way that was *designed* to be similar to the interactive rebase, it then goes on to *error out* if the commands disagree with the overall action (cherry-pick or revert). Finally, the sequencer code chose to deviate from the interactive rebase code insofar that when it comes to writing the file with the remaining commands, it *reformats* the "todo" script instead of just writing the part of the parsed script that were not yet processed. This is not only unnecessary churn, but might well lose information that is valuable to the user (i.e. comments after the commands). Let's just bite the bullet and rewrite the entire parser; the code now becomes not only more elegant: it allows us to go on and teach the sequencer how to parse *true* "todo" scripts as used by the interactive rebase itself. In a way, the sequencer is about to grow up to do its older brother's job. Better. In particular, we choose to maintain the list of commands in an array instead of a linked list: this is flexible enough to allow us later on to even implement rebase -i's reordering of fixup!/squash! commits very easily (and with a very nice speed bonus, at least on Windows). While at it, do not stop at the first problem, but list *all* of the problems. This will help the user when the sequencer will do `rebase -i`'s work by allowing to address all issues in one go rather than going back and forth until the todo list is valid. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-10-21 15:24:41 +03:00
struct todo_list todo_list = TODO_LIST_INIT;
unsigned char sha1[20];
sequencer: completely revamp the "todo" script parsing When we came up with the "sequencer" idea, we really wanted to have kind of a plumbing equivalent of the interactive rebase. Hence the choice of words: the "todo" script, a "pick", etc. However, when it came time to implement the entire shebang, somehow this idea got lost and the sequencer was used as working horse for cherry-pick and revert instead. So as not to interfere with the interactive rebase, it even uses a separate directory to store its state. Furthermore, it also is stupidly strict about the "todo" script it accepts: while it parses commands in a way that was *designed* to be similar to the interactive rebase, it then goes on to *error out* if the commands disagree with the overall action (cherry-pick or revert). Finally, the sequencer code chose to deviate from the interactive rebase code insofar that when it comes to writing the file with the remaining commands, it *reformats* the "todo" script instead of just writing the part of the parsed script that were not yet processed. This is not only unnecessary churn, but might well lose information that is valuable to the user (i.e. comments after the commands). Let's just bite the bullet and rewrite the entire parser; the code now becomes not only more elegant: it allows us to go on and teach the sequencer how to parse *true* "todo" scripts as used by the interactive rebase itself. In a way, the sequencer is about to grow up to do its older brother's job. Better. In particular, we choose to maintain the list of commands in an array instead of a linked list: this is flexible enough to allow us later on to even implement rebase -i's reordering of fixup!/squash! commits very easily (and with a very nice speed bonus, at least on Windows). While at it, do not stop at the first problem, but list *all* of the problems. This will help the user when the sequencer will do `rebase -i`'s work by allowing to address all issues in one go rather than going back and forth until the todo list is valid. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-10-21 15:24:41 +03:00
int i, res;
assert(opts->revs);
if (read_and_refresh_cache(opts))
return -1;
for (i = 0; i < opts->revs->pending.nr; i++) {
unsigned char sha1[20];
const char *name = opts->revs->pending.objects[i].name;
/* This happens when using --stdin. */
if (!strlen(name))
continue;
if (!get_sha1(name, sha1)) {
if (!lookup_commit_reference_gently(sha1, 1)) {
enum object_type type = sha1_object_info(sha1, NULL);
return error(_("%s: can't cherry-pick a %s"),
name, typename(type));
}
} else
return error(_("%s: bad revision"), name);
}
/*
* If we were called as "git cherry-pick <commit>", just
* cherry-pick/revert it, set CHERRY_PICK_HEAD /
* REVERT_HEAD, and don't touch the sequencer state.
* This means it is possible to cherry-pick in the middle
* of a cherry-pick sequence.
*/
if (opts->revs->cmdline.nr == 1 &&
opts->revs->cmdline.rev->whence == REV_CMD_REV &&
opts->revs->no_walk &&
!opts->revs->cmdline.rev->flags) {
struct commit *cmit;
if (prepare_revision_walk(opts->revs))
return error(_("revision walk setup failed"));
cmit = get_revision(opts->revs);
if (!cmit || get_revision(opts->revs))
return error("BUG: expected exactly one commit from walk");
return single_pick(cmit, opts);
}
/*
* Start a new cherry-pick/ revert sequence; but
* first, make sure that an existing one isn't in
* progress
*/
if (walk_revs_populate_todo(&todo_list, opts) ||
create_seq_dir() < 0)
return -1;
if (get_sha1("HEAD", sha1) && (opts->action == REPLAY_REVERT))
return error(_("can't revert as initial commit"));
if (save_head(sha1_to_hex(sha1)))
return -1;
if (save_opts(opts))
return -1;
update_abort_safety_file();
sequencer: completely revamp the "todo" script parsing When we came up with the "sequencer" idea, we really wanted to have kind of a plumbing equivalent of the interactive rebase. Hence the choice of words: the "todo" script, a "pick", etc. However, when it came time to implement the entire shebang, somehow this idea got lost and the sequencer was used as working horse for cherry-pick and revert instead. So as not to interfere with the interactive rebase, it even uses a separate directory to store its state. Furthermore, it also is stupidly strict about the "todo" script it accepts: while it parses commands in a way that was *designed* to be similar to the interactive rebase, it then goes on to *error out* if the commands disagree with the overall action (cherry-pick or revert). Finally, the sequencer code chose to deviate from the interactive rebase code insofar that when it comes to writing the file with the remaining commands, it *reformats* the "todo" script instead of just writing the part of the parsed script that were not yet processed. This is not only unnecessary churn, but might well lose information that is valuable to the user (i.e. comments after the commands). Let's just bite the bullet and rewrite the entire parser; the code now becomes not only more elegant: it allows us to go on and teach the sequencer how to parse *true* "todo" scripts as used by the interactive rebase itself. In a way, the sequencer is about to grow up to do its older brother's job. Better. In particular, we choose to maintain the list of commands in an array instead of a linked list: this is flexible enough to allow us later on to even implement rebase -i's reordering of fixup!/squash! commits very easily (and with a very nice speed bonus, at least on Windows). While at it, do not stop at the first problem, but list *all* of the problems. This will help the user when the sequencer will do `rebase -i`'s work by allowing to address all issues in one go rather than going back and forth until the todo list is valid. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-10-21 15:24:41 +03:00
res = pick_commits(&todo_list, opts);
todo_list_release(&todo_list);
return res;
}
void append_signoff(struct strbuf *msgbuf, int ignore_footer, unsigned flag)
{
unsigned no_dup_sob = flag & APPEND_SIGNOFF_DEDUP;
struct strbuf sob = STRBUF_INIT;
int has_footer;
strbuf_addstr(&sob, sign_off_header);
strbuf_addstr(&sob, fmt_name(getenv("GIT_COMMITTER_NAME"),
getenv("GIT_COMMITTER_EMAIL")));
strbuf_addch(&sob, '\n');
/*
* If the whole message buffer is equal to the sob, pretend that we
* found a conforming footer with a matching sob
*/
if (msgbuf->len - ignore_footer == sob.len &&
!strncmp(msgbuf->buf, sob.buf, sob.len))
has_footer = 3;
else
has_footer = has_conforming_footer(msgbuf, &sob, ignore_footer);
if (!has_footer) {
const char *append_newlines = NULL;
size_t len = msgbuf->len - ignore_footer;
if (!len) {
/*
* The buffer is completely empty. Leave foom for
* the title and body to be filled in by the user.
*/
append_newlines = "\n\n";
} else if (msgbuf->buf[len - 1] != '\n') {
/*
* Incomplete line. Complete the line and add a
* blank one so that there is an empty line between
* the message body and the sob.
*/
append_newlines = "\n\n";
} else if (len == 1) {
/*
* Buffer contains a single newline. Add another
* so that we leave room for the title and body.
*/
append_newlines = "\n";
} else if (msgbuf->buf[len - 2] != '\n') {
/*
* Buffer ends with a single newline. Add another
* so that there is an empty line between the message
* body and the sob.
*/
append_newlines = "\n";
} /* else, the buffer already ends with two newlines. */
if (append_newlines)
strbuf_splice(msgbuf, msgbuf->len - ignore_footer, 0,
append_newlines, strlen(append_newlines));
}
if (has_footer != 3 && (!no_dup_sob || has_footer != 2))
strbuf_splice(msgbuf, msgbuf->len - ignore_footer, 0,
sob.buf, sob.len);
strbuf_release(&sob);
}