Web lists-archives.com

Re: How to use filter-branch with --state-branch?

2018-03-09 14:23 GMT+01:00 Ian Campbell <ijc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> On Fri, 2018-03-09 at 14:04 +0100, Michele Locati wrote:
>> Just a couple of questions:
>> 1. it seems to me it's not possible to process all the branches in one
>> go. Am I right?
> I'm not sure, I've never done such a thing, in fact I didn't know you
> could.
> Really all this feature does is record the `.git/rewrite-map` (or
> whatever the correct name is) at the end of the rewrite and reinstate
> it again the next time, so it shouldn't really interact with many of
> the other options.
> My method for storeing "last version processed" in a branch does
> conflict I suppose (since that branch would be rewritten) but that's an
> artefact of the surrounding scaffolding -- you could equally well keep
> the record in some file on the local system or in a non-branch-ish ref
> (I guess).
>> 2. Why do you have this line in filter.sh?
>> `rm -f .git/refs/original/refs/heads/${UPSTREAM_REWRITTEN}`
> TBH I'm not really sure. I originally wrote this patch many years ago,
> it's just recently that I got around to upstreaming, so my memory is
> more fuzzy than might be expected.
> I think perhaps I was trying to avoid this error:
>     A previous backup already exists in $orig_namespace
>     Force overwriting the backup with -f"
> which comes if there is an existing backup (a safety feature in the
> non-incremental case).
> Note quite sure why I didn't use `-f` as the message says, but I guess
> because it forces other things too which I didn't want to do?
> Perhaps what I should have done is make that check conditional on the
> use of --state-branch.
> I wonder if you could use the `original/refs/...` as the "last version
> processed"? Would be a lot less manual messing around than what I do!
> Ian.

I managed to get a general script that seems to work: see

Thanks again, Ian.