public inbox for git@vger.kernel.org 
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Johannes Sixt <J.Sixt@eudaptics•com>
To: Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx•de>
Cc: gitster@pobox•com, git@vger•kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] filter-branch: rewrite only refs which were not  excludedbythe options
Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 16:08:43 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <46A607EB.BA31D7C5@eudaptics.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: Pine.LNX.4.64.0707241435290.14781@racer.site

Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Jul 2007, Johannes Sixt wrote:
> > This worked:
> >
> > negatives=`git rev-parse --revs-only "$@" | while read line
> >       do
> >               case "$line" in
> >               $_x40) ;;
> >               *) echo "$line";;
> >               esac
> >       done`
> >
> > i.e. the closing parenthesis in the case arms together with the opening
> > $( made for a syntax error. The --revs-only did not hurt in my tests,
> > but you may have other reasons to remove it.
> 
> Funny.  AFAIR something similar worked here, all the time.  But I believe
> you... you're on MinGW, right?

No. filter-branch is a shell script. I don't have time to waste ;)
It happens in bash 2.05b on Linux.

> > But there's another problem. Consider this history:
> >
> >    ---X--o--M         <- master
> >              \
> >           ...-o-...-o <- topic
> >
> > Then this (rather contrieved) command:
> >
> >    $ git-filter-branch -n $n master topic --not X
> >
> > If $n is small enough so that M is never rewritten, then
> >
> >    git rev-list -1 "$ref" $negatives
> >
> > still expands to non-empty even for 'master' (= M), which then
> > incorrectly ends up in "$tempdir"/heads.
> 
> Aaargh!  Of course!  Since I have to add --topo-order at the end.
> Otherwise it makes no sense.

No, that was no my point: In my example above, if n=1, `git rev-list -1
"$ref" $negatives` evaluates to

    $ git rev-list -1 "master" -n 1 ^X

which returns M, even though M is not going to be rewritten.
--topo-order changes nothing. The problem is that the -n is a relative
restriction. --since is turned into --max-age, which is absolute,
therefore, the test works as expected with --since.

> > I think the decision whether a positive ref should be rewritten should
> > be postponed until the rewrite has completed. Because then we know for
> > certain which revs were treated and can pick the matching refs. We only
> > lose the check for the error "Which ref do you want to rewrite?"
> 
> No, that is not enough:
> 
>         A - B - C
> 
> B touches the subdirectory sub/.
> 
>         git filter-branch C -- sub/
> 
> will not rewrite C.

Fair enough.

-- Hannes

  reply	other threads:[~2007-07-24 14:08 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-07-23 17:34 [PATCH] filter-branch: Big syntax change; support rewriting multiple refs Johannes Schindelin
2007-07-24  5:35 ` Junio C Hamano
2007-07-24  9:10   ` Johannes Schindelin
2007-07-24  9:27 ` [PATCH] filter-branch: Big syntax change; support rewriting multiplerefs Johannes Sixt
2007-07-24 10:36   ` [PATCH] filter-branch: when dwim'ing a ref, only allow heads and tags Johannes Schindelin
2007-07-24 11:04     ` [PATCH] filter-branch: when dwim'ing a ref, only allow heads andtags Johannes Sixt
2007-07-24 11:20       ` Johannes Schindelin
2007-07-24 11:27         ` [PATCH] filter-branch: when dwim'ing a ref, only allow heads and tags Johannes Schindelin
2007-07-24 11:06   ` [PATCH] filter-branch: rewrite only refs which were not excluded by the options Johannes Schindelin
2007-07-24 11:23     ` [PATCH] filter-branch: rewrite only refs which were not excluded bythe options Johannes Sixt
2007-07-24 11:33       ` Johannes Schindelin
2007-07-24 13:32         ` [PATCH] filter-branch: rewrite only refs which were not excludedbythe options Johannes Sixt
2007-07-24 13:41           ` Johannes Schindelin
2007-07-24 14:08             ` Johannes Sixt [this message]
2007-07-24 14:21               ` Johannes Schindelin
2007-07-24 15:03                 ` Johannes Sixt
2007-07-24 19:52                   ` Johannes Schindelin
2007-07-24 13:42           ` [REVISED PATCH] filter-branch: rewrite only unexcluded refs Johannes Schindelin
2007-07-24 13:33         ` [PATCH] filter-branch: rewrite only refs which were not excludedbythe options Johannes Sixt
2007-07-24 13:46           ` Johannes Schindelin

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=46A607EB.BA31D7C5@eudaptics.com \
    --to=j.sixt@eudaptics$(echo .)com \
    --cc=Johannes.Schindelin@gmx$(echo .)de \
    --cc=git@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
    --cc=gitster@pobox$(echo .)com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox