Re: [PATCH 2/2] name-rev: favor describing with tags and use committer date to tiebreak
- Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2017 01:09:50 +0800
- From: Lars Schneider <larsxschneider@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] name-rev: favor describing with tags and use committer date to tiebreak
> On 17 Mar 2017, at 13:56, Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>> Lars Schneider <larsxschneider@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>> A quick bisect indicates that this patch might break
>>> t9807-git-p4-submit.sh 8 and 13. I haven't looked into
>>> it further, yet.
>> As I do not do P4, help in diagnosing why it breaks is appreciated.
>> If the test script expects...
>> On the other hand, if git-p4 command internally uses name-rev and it
>> is not prepared to properly handle commits that can be named in more
>> than one way, the problem would be deeper, as it would mean it can
>> misbehave even without the change to name-rev when multiple branches
>> point at the same commit.
> Yikes. Perhaps something along this line?
> This function seems to want to learn which branch we are on, and
> running "name-rev HEAD" is *NEVER* the right way to do so. If you
> are on branch B which happens to point at the same commit as branch
> A, "name-rev HEAD" can say either A or B (and it is likely it would
> say A simply because it sorts earlier, and the logic seems to favor
> the one that was discovered earlier when all else being equal).
> git-p4.py | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> diff --git a/git-p4.py b/git-p4.py
> index eab319d76e..351d1ab58e 100755
> --- a/git-p4.py
> +++ b/git-p4.py
> @@ -582,7 +582,7 @@ def currentGitBranch():
> # on a detached head
> return None
> - return read_pipe(["git", "name-rev", "HEAD"]).split(" ").strip()
> + return read_pipe(["git", "symbolic-ref", "HEAD"]).strip()[11:]
> def isValidGitDir(path):
> return git_dir(path) != None
Following your explanation this patch looks good to me and this fixes the
test failure. TBH I never thought about the difference of these commands
before. "rev" and "ref" sound so similar although they denote completely