This is the behavior of the shell script version of the interactive
rebase, by using the `output` function defined in `git-rebase.sh`.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
This is the behavior of the shell script version of the interactive
rebase, by using the `output` function defined in `git-rebase.sh`.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
This will be needed to hide the output of `git commit` when the
sequencer handles an interactive rebase's script.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
In the upcoming patch, we will support rebase -i's progress
reporting. The progress skips comments but counts 'noop's.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
The parsing part of a 'drop' command is almost identical to parsing a
'pick', while the operation is the same as that of a 'noop'.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
The interactive rebase has the very special magic that a cherry-pick
that exits with a status different from 0 and 1 signifies a failure to
even record that a cherry-pick was started.
This can happen e.g. when a fast-forward fails because it would
overwrite untracked files.
In that case, we must reschedule the command that we thought we already
had at least started successfully.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
The sequencer already has an idea about using different merge
strategies. We just piggy-back on top of that, using rebase -i's
own settings, when running the sequencer in interactive rebase mode.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Git's `rebase` command inspects the `rebase.autostash` config setting
to determine whether it should stash any uncommitted changes before
rebasing and re-apply them afterwards.
As we introduce more bits and pieces to let the sequencer act as
interactive rebase's backend, here is the part that adds support for
the autostash feature.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
When continuing after a `pick` command failed, we want that commit
to show up in the rewritten-list (and its notes to be rewritten), too.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
When rebasing commits that have commit notes attached, the interactive
rebase rewrites those notes faithfully at the end. The sequencer must
do this, too, if it wishes to do interactive rebase's job.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
We already used the same reflog message as the scripted version of rebase
-i when finishing. With this commit, we do that also for all the commands
before that.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
This makes the code DRYer, with the obvious benefit that we can enhance
the code further in a single place.
We can also reuse the functionality elsewhere by calling this new
function.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
The sequencer already knew how to fast-forward instead of
cherry-picking, if possible.
We want to continue to do this, of course, but in case of the 'reword'
command, we will need to call `git commit` after fast-forwarding.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
This is now trivial, as all the building blocks are in place: all we need
to do is to flip the "edit" switch when committing.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Just like the interactive rebase, we want to leave a 'patch' file for
further inspection by the user (even if we never tried to actually apply
that patch, since we're cherry-picking instead).
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
An interactive rebase operates on a detached HEAD (to keep the reflog
of the original branch relatively clean), and updates the branch only
at the end.
Now that the sequencer learns to perform interactive rebases, it also
needs to learn the trick to update the branch before removing the
directory containing the state of the interactive rebase.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
When the last command of an interactive rebase fails, the user needs to
resolve the problem and then continue the interactive rebase. Naturally,
the todo script is empty by then. So let's not complain about that!
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
When a cherry-pick continues without a "todo script", the intention is
simply to pick a single commit.
However, when an interactive rebase is continued without a "todo
script", it means that the last command has been completed and that we
now need to clean up.
This commit guards the revert/cherry-pick specific steps so that they
are not executed in rebase -i mode.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
When an interactive rebase is interrupted, the user may stage changes
before continuing, and we need to commit those changes in that case.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
When the interactive rebase aborts, it writes out an author-script file
to record the author information for the current commit. As we are about
to teach the sequencer how to perform the actions behind an interactive
rebase, it needs to write those author-script files, too.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
For users' convenience, most rebase commands can be abbreviated, e.g.
'p' instead of 'pick' and 'x' instead of 'exec'. Let's teach the
sequencer to handle those abbreviated commands just fine.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
This is a huge patch, and at the same time a huge step forward to
execute the performance-critical parts of the interactive rebase in a
builtin command.
Since 'fixup' and 'squash' are not only similar, but also need to know
about each other (we want to reduce a series of fixups/squashes into a
single, final commit message edit, from the user's point of view), we
really have to implement them both at the same time.
Most of the actual work is done by the existing code path that already
handles the "pick" and the "edit" commands; We added support for other
features (e.g. to amend the commit message) in the patches leading up to
this one, yet there are still quite a few bits in this patch that simply
would not make sense as individual patches (such as: determining whether
there was anything to "fix up" in the "todo" script, etc).
In theory, it would be possible to reuse the fast-forward code path also
for the fixup and the squash code paths, but in practice this would make
the code less readable. The end result cannot be fast-forwarded anyway,
therefore let's just extend the cherry-picking code path for now.
Since the sequencer parses the entire `git-rebase-todo` script in one go,
fixup or squash commands without a preceding pick can be reported early
(in git-rebase--interactive, we could only report such errors just before
executing the fixup/squash).
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
In the interactive rebase, commands that were successfully processed are
not simply discarded, but appended to the 'done' file instead. This is
used e.g. to display the current state to the user in the output of
`git status` or the progress.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
When calling `git rebase -i -v`, the user wants to see some statistics
after the commits were rebased. Let's show some.
The strbuf we use to perform that task will be used for other things
in subsequent commits, hence it is declared and initialized in a wider
scope than strictly needed here.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
The 'exec' command is a little special among rebase -i's commands, as it
does *not* have a SHA-1 as first parameter. Instead, everything after the
`exec` command is treated as command-line to execute.
Let's reuse the arg/arg_len fields of the todo_item structure (which hold
the oneline for pick/edit commands) to point to the command-line.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
This patch is a straight-forward reimplementation of the `edit`
operation of the interactive rebase command.
Well, not *quite* straight-forward: when stopping, the `edit`
command wants to write the `patch` file (which is not only the
patch, but includes the commit message and author information). To
that end, this patch requires the earlier work that taught the
log-tree machinery to respect the `file` setting of
rev_info->diffopt to write to a file stream different than stdout.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
The 'noop' command is probably the most boring of all rebase -i commands
to support in the sequencer.
Which makes it an excellent candidate for this first stab to add support
for rebase -i's commands to the sequencer.
For the moment, let's also treat empty lines and commented-out lines as
'noop'; We will refine that handling later in this patch series.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
This patch introduces a new action for the sequencer. It really does not
do a whole lot of its own right now, but lays the ground work for
patches to come. The intention, of course, is to finally make the
sequencer the work horse of the interactive rebase (the original idea
behind the "sequencer" concept).
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
The write_message() function safely writes an strbuf to a file.
Sometimes this is inconvenient, though: the text to be written may not
be stored in a strbuf, or the strbuf should not be released after
writing.
Let's allow for such use cases by refactoring write_message() to allow
for a convenience function write_file_gently(). As some of the upcoming
callers of that new function will want to append a newline character,
let's just add a flag for that, too.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Interactive rebase's scripts may be indented; We need to handle this
case, too, now that we prepare the sequencer to process interactive
rebases.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
The return value of do_recursive_merge() may be positive (indicating merge
conflicts), so let's OR later error conditions so as not to overwrite them
with 0.
This is not yet a problem, but preparing for the patches to come: we will
teach the sequencer to do rebase -i's job.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
The sequencer_commit() function already knows how to amend commits, and
with this new option, it can also clean up commit messages (i.e. strip
out commented lines). This is needed to implement rebase -i's 'fixup'
and 'squash' commands as sequencer commands.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
This teaches the sequencer_commit() function to take an argument that
will allow us to implement "todo" commands that need to amend the commit
messages ("fixup", "squash" and "reword").
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
In the upcoming commits, we will implement more and more of rebase
-i's functionality. One particular feature of the commands to come is
that some of them allow editing the commit message while others don't,
i.e. we cannot define in the replay_opts whether the commit message
should be edited or not.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
The rebase command sports a `--gpg-sign` option that is heeded by the
interactive rebase.
This patch teaches the sequencer that trick, as part of the bigger
effort to make the sequencer the work horse of the interactive rebase.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
As we are slowly teaching the sequencer to perform the hard work for
the interactive rebase, we need to read files that were written by
shell scripts.
These files typically contain a single line and are invariably ended
by a line feed (and possibly a carriage return before that). Let's use
a helper to read such files and to remove the line ending.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
In interactive rebases, we commit a little bit differently than the
sequencer did so far: we heed the "author-script", the "message" and
the "amend" files in the .git/rebase-merge/ subdirectory.
Likewise, we may want to edit the commit message *even* when providing
a file containing the suggested commit message. Therefore we change the
code to not even provide a default message when we do not want any, and
to call the editor explicitly.
As interactive rebase's GPG settings are configured differently from
how cherry-pick (and therefore sequencer) handles them, we will leave
support for that to the next commit.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
The `git-rebase-todo` file contains a list of commands. Most of those
commands have the form
<verb> <sha1> <oneline>
The <oneline> is displayed primarily for the user's convenience, as
rebase -i really interprets only the <verb> <sha1> part. However, there
are *some* places in interactive rebase where the <oneline> is used to
display messages, e.g. for reporting at which commit we stopped.
So let's just remember it when parsing the todo file; we keep a copy of
the entire todo file anyway (to write out the new `done` and
`git-rebase-todo` file just before processing each command), so all we
need to do is remember the begin and end offsets.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Not only does this DRY up the code (providing a better documentation what
the code is about, as well as allowing to change the behavior in a single
place), it also makes it substantially shorter to use the same
functionality in functions to be introduced when we teach the sequencer to
process interactive-rebase's git-rebase-todo file.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
The subcommands are used exactly once, at the very beginning of
sequencer_pick_revisions(), to determine what to do. This is an
unnecessary level of indirection: we can simply call the correct
function to begin with. So let's do that.
While at it, ensure that the subcommands return an error code so that
they do not have to die() all over the place (bad practice for library
functions...).
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
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 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.
While at it, do not stop at the first problem, but list *all* of the
problems. This helps the user 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>
The sequencer was introduced to make the cherry-pick and revert
functionality available as library function, with the original idea
being to extend the sequencer to also implement the rebase -i
functionality.
The test to ensure that all of the commands in the script are identical
to the overall operation does not mesh well with that.
Therefore let's just get rid of the test that wants to verify that this
limitation is still in place, in preparation for the upcoming work to
teach the sequencer to do rebase -i's work.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Over the next commits, we will work on improving the sequencer to the
point where it can process the edit script of an interactive rebase. To
that end, we will need to teach the sequencer to read interactive
rebase's todo file. In preparation, we consolidate all places where
that todo file is needed to call a function that we will later extend.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
The sequencer reads options from disk and stores them in its struct
for use during sequencer's operations.
With this patch, the memory is released afterwards, plugging a
memory leak.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
