rev-parse: rev-parse: add --is-shallow-repository
PATCH 1/1 rev-parse: rev-parse: add --is-shallow-repository
Running git fetch --unshallow on a repo that is not in fact shallow produces a fatal error message. Add a helper to rev-parse that scripters can use to determine whether a repo is shallow or not.
--- Documentation/git-rev-parse.txt | 3 +++ builtin/rev-parse.c | 5 +++++ t/t1500-rev-parse.sh | 15 +++++++++++++++ 3 files changed, 23 insertions(+)
Documentation/git-rev-parse.txt +3 -0
@@ -235,6 +235,9 @@ print a message to stderr and exit with nonzero status. --is-bare-repository:: When the repository is bare print "true", otherwise "false". +--is-shallow-repository:: + When the repository is shallow print "true", otherwise "false". + --resolve-git-dir <path>:: Check if <path> is a valid repository or a gitfile that points at a valid repository, and print the location of the
builtin/rev-parse.c +5 -0
@@ -868,6 +868,11 @@ int cmd_rev_parse(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix) : "false");continue ; } +if (!strcmp (arg,"--is-shallow-repository" )) { +printf ("%s\n" ,is_repository_shallow () ?"true" + :"false" ); +continue ; + }if (!strcmp (arg,"--shared-index-path" )) {if (read_cache () <0 )die (_ ("Could not read the index" ));
t/t1500-rev-parse.sh +15 -0
@@ -116,6 +116,21 @@ test_expect_success 'git-path inside sub-dir' ' test_cmp expect actual ' +test_expect_success 'git-path shallow repository' ' + test_commit test_commit && + echo true >expect && + git clone --depth 1 --no-local . shallow && + test_when_finished "rm -rf shallow" && + git -C shallow rev-parse --is-shallow-repository >actual && + test_cmp expect actual +' + +test_expect_success 'git-path notshallow repository' ' + echo false >expect && + git rev-parse --is-shallow-repository >actual && + test_cmp expect actual +' + test_expect_success 'showing the superproject correctly' ' git rev-parse --show-superproject-working-tree >out && test_must_be_empty out &&
Signature · 1 line
2.11.0.485.g4e59582
Hi,
Quoted 2 lines · Øystein Walle
Running
git fetch --unshallowon a repo that is not in fact shallow produces a fatal error message.
Hm, can you say more about the context? From a certain point of view, it might make sense for that command to succeed instead: if the repo is already unshallow, then why should't "fetch --unshallow" complain instead of declaring victory?
Quoted 9 lines
Add a helper to rev-parse that scripters
can use to determine whether a repo is shallow or not.Signed-off-by Øystein Walle <[email protected]>--- Documentation/git-rev-parse.txt | 3 +++ builtin/rev-parse.c | 5 +++++ t/t1500-rev-parse.sh | 15 +++++++++++++++ 3 files changed, 23 insertions(+)
Regardless, this new rev-parse --is-shallow helper looks like a good feature.
[...]
builtin/rev-parse.c int cmd_rev_parse(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix) · line 875
Quoted 11 lines
builtin/rev-parse.c +5
-0@@ -868,6 +868,11 @@ int cmd_rev_parse(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix) : "false");continue ; } +if (!strcmp (arg,"--is-shallow-repository" )) { +printf ("%s\n" ,is_repository_shallow () ?"true" + :"false" ); +continue ; + }
The implementation is straightforward and correct.
[...]
t/t1500-rev-parse.sh
Quoted 2 lines
t/t1500-rev-parse.sh +0
-0
Thanks for writing tests. \o/
t/t1500-rev-parse.sh test_expect_success 'git-path inside sub-dir' ' · line 119
Quoted 5 lines
t/t1500-rev-parse.sh +1
-0@@ -116,6 +116,21 @@ test_expect_success 'git-path inside sub-dir' ' test_cmp expect actual ' +test_expect_success 'git-path shallow repository' '
What does git-path mean here? I wonder if it's a copy/paste error. Did you mean something like
test_expect_success 'rev-parse --is-shallow-repository in shallow repo' '
?
t/t1500-rev-parse.sh test_expect_success 'git-path inside sub-dir' ' · line 128
Quoted 9 lines
t/t1500-rev-parse.sh +9
-0+ test_commit test_commit && + echo true >expect && + git clone --depth 1 --no-local . shallow && + test_when_finished "rm -rf shallow" && + git -C shallow rev-parse --is-shallow-repository >actual && + test_cmp expect actual +' + +test_expect_success 'git-path notshallow repository' '
Likewise: should this be
test_expect_success 'rev-parse --is-shallow-repository in non-shallow repo' '
?
t/t1500-rev-parse.sh test_expect_success 'git-path inside sub-dir' ' · line 134
Quoted 6 lines
t/t1500-rev-parse.sh +5
-0+ echo false >expect && + git rev-parse --is-shallow-repository >actual && + test_cmp expect actual +' + test_expect_success 'showing the superproject correctly' '
With the two tweaks mentioned above,
Thanks.
Quoted 4 lines · Jonathan Nieder
Quoted 1 line
test_expect_success'showing the superproject correctly' 'With the two tweaks mentioned above,
Reviewed-by Jonathan Nieder <[email protected]>
I agree with the fixes to the test titles suggested, so I'll queue the patch with the fixes squashed in. Hearing "yeah, the titles were copy-pasted without adjusting, thanks for fixing, Jonathan!" sent by Øystein would be super nice.
Thanks, both.
Quoted 4 lines
Hm, can you say more about the context? From a certain point of view, it might make sense for that command to succeed instead: if the repo is already unshallow, then why should't "fetch --unshallow" complain instead of declaring victory?
A fellow in #git on Freenode was writing a script for automation and encountered this error, and asked how to find out whether a repo was shallow. My *first instinct* was to check if rev-parse had a flag for it; I wouldn't have been surprised if it did.
I agree that treating it as a fatal error is a bit much in the first place, but I also think having a way to check can be useful. I also wonder if a lot of the stuff rev-parse is used for now should be moved to some sort of git misc command, but that's a different can of worms, so into rev-parse a new flag went.
Quoted 3 lines
What does git-path mean here? I wonder if it's a copy/paste error.
...Reviewed-by Jonathan Nieder <[email protected]>
Yeah, the titles were copy-pasted without adjusting, thanks for fixing, Jonathan! ;)
Quoted 4 lines
I agree with the fixes to the test titles suggested, so I'll queue the patch with the fixes squashed in. Hearing "yeah, the titles were copy-pasted without adjusting, thanks for fixing, Jonathan!" sent by =C3=98ystein would be super nice.
Sounds good. Thanks for queueing my patch. My fourth!
�sse