[PATCH v3 9/9] sha1_name.c: get_describe_name() by definition groks only commits
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
---
sha1_name.c | 3 +-
t/t1512-rev-parse-disambiguation.sh | 172 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
2 files changed, 174 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
create mode 100755 t/t1512-rev-parse-disambiguation.sh
diff --git a/sha1_name.c b/sha1_name.c
index 58dbbe2..15e97eb 100644
--- a/sha1_name.c
+++ b/sha1_name.c
@@ -606,6 +606,7 @@ static int peel_onion(const char *name, int len, unsigned char *sha1)
static int get_describe_name(const char *name, int len, unsigned char *sha1)
{
const char *cp;
+ unsigned flags = GET_SHORT_QUIETLY | GET_SHORT_COMMIT_ONLY;
for (cp = name + len - 1; name + 2 <= cp; cp--) {
char ch = *cp;
@@ -616,7 +617,7 @@ static int get_describe_name(const char *name, int len, unsigned char *sha1)
if (ch == 'g' && cp[-1] == '-') {
cp++;
len -= cp - name;
- return get_short_sha1(cp, len, sha1, GET_SHORT_QUIETLY);
+ return get_short_sha1(cp, len, sha1, flags);
}
}
}
diff --git a/t/t1512-rev-parse-disambiguation.sh b/t/t1512-rev-parse-disambiguation.sh
new file mode 100755
index 0000000..ad16f32
--- /dev/null
+++ b/t/t1512-rev-parse-disambiguation.sh
@@ -0,0 +1,172 @@
+#!/bin/sh
+
+test_description='object name disambiguation
+
+Create blobs, trees, commits and a tag that all share the same
+prefix, and make sure "git rev-parse" can take advantage of
+type information to disambiguate short object names that are
+not necessarily unique.
+
+The final history used in the test has five commits, with the bottom
+one tagged as v1.0.0. They all have one regular file each.
+
+ +-------------------------------------------+
+ | |
+ | .-------cs60sb5----- d59np2z |
+ | / / |
+ | d8znjge0 ---a2dit76---b4crl15 |
+ | |
+ +-------------------------------------------+
+
+'
+
+. ./test-lib.sh
+
+test_expect_success 'blob and tree' '
+ (
+ for i in 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
+ do
+ echo $i
+ done
+ echo
+ echo cbpkuqa
+ ) >bz01t33 &&
+
+ # create one blob 1102198254
+ git add bz01t33 &&
+
+ # create one tree 1102198206
+ git write-tree
+'
+
+test_expect_failure 'disambiguate tree-ish' '
+ # feed tree-ish in an unambiguous way
+ git rev-parse --verify 1102198206:bz01t33 &&
+
+ # ambiguous at the object name level, but there is only one
+ # such tree-ish (the other is a blob)
+ git rev-parse --verify 11021982:bz01t33
+'
+
+test_expect_success 'first commit' '
+ # create one commit 1102198268
+ test_tick &&
+ git commit -m d8znjge0
+'
+
+test_expect_failure 'disambiguate commit-ish' '
+ # feed commit-ish in an unambiguous way
+ git rev-parse --verify 1102198268^{commit} &&
+
+ # ambiguous at the object name level, but there is only one
+ # such commit (the others are tree and blob)
+ git rev-parse --verify 11021982^{commit} &&
+
+ # likewise
+ git rev-parse --verify 11021982^0
+'
+
+test_expect_success 'first tag' '
+ # create one tag 1102198256
+ git tag -a -m d3g97ek v1.0.0
+'
+
+test_expect_failure 'two semi-ambiguous commit-ish' '
+ # Once the parser becomes ultra-smart, it could notice that
+ # 110282 before ^{commit} name many different objects, but
+ # that only two (HEAD and v1.0.0 tag) can be peeled to commit,
+ # and that peeling them down to commit yield the same commit
+ # without ambiguity.
+ git rev-parse --verify 110282^{commit}
+'
+
+test_expect_failure 'three semi-ambiguous tree-ish' '
+ # Likewise for tree-ish. HEAD, v1.0.0 and HEAD^{tree} share
+ # the prefix but peeling them to tree yields the same thing
+ git rev-parse --verify 110282^{tree}
+'
+
+test_expect_success 'parse describe name' '
+ # feed an unambiguous describe name
+ git rev-parse --verify v1.0.0-0-g1102198268 &&
+
+ # ambiguous at the object name level, but there is only one
+ # such commit (others are blob, tree and tag)
+ git rev-parse --verify v1.0.0-0-g11021982
+'
+
+test_expect_success 'more history' '
+ # commit 110219822
+ git mv bz01t33 b90au8x &&
+ echo bdc8xi8 >>b90au8x &&
+ git add b90au8x &&
+
+ test_tick &&
+ git commit -m a2dit76 &&
+
+ # commit 110219828
+ git mv b90au8x djintr2 &&
+ echo a2a49zt >>djintr2 &&
+ git add djintr2 &&
+
+ test_tick &&
+ git commit -m b4crl15 &&
+
+ # commit 11021982d
+ git checkout v1.0.0^0 &&
+ git mv bz01t33 ddp2qt1 &&
+
+ for i in bdc8xi8 a2a49zt c0l9aeu
+ do
+ echo $i
+ done >>ddp2qt1 &&
+ git add ddp2qt1 &&
+
+ test_tick &&
+ git commit -m cs60sb5 &&
+ side=$(git rev-parse HEAD) &&
+
+ # commit 11021982a
+ git checkout master &&
+
+ # If you use recursive, merge will fail and you will need to
+ # clean up bz01t33 as well. If you use resolve, merge will
+ # succeed.
+ test_might_fail git merge --no-commit -s resolve $side &&
+ git rm -f ddp2qt1 djintr2 &&
+ test_might_fail git rm -f bz01t33 &&
+ (
+ git cat-file blob $side:ddp2qt1
+ echo d4o8f4f
+ ) >c3q9963 &&
+ git add c3q9963 &&
+
+ test_tick &&
+ git commit -m d59np2z
+
+'
+
+test_expect_failure 'parse describe name taking advantage of generation' '
+ # ambiguous at the object name level, but there is only one
+ # such commit at generation 0
+ git rev-parse --verify v1.0.0-0-g11021982 &&
+
+ # likewise for generation 2 and 4
+ git rev-parse --verify v1.0.0-2-g11021982 &&
+ git rev-parse --verify v1.0.0-4-g11021982
+'
+
+# Note: because rev-parse does not even try to disambiguate based on
+# the generation number, this test currently succeeds for a wrong
+# reason. When it learns to use the generation number, the previous
+# test should succeed, and also this test should fail because the
+# describe name used in the test with generation number can name two
+# commits. Make sure that such a future enhancement does not randomly
+# pick one.
+test_expect_success 'parse describe name not ignoring ambiguity' '
+ # ambiguous at the object name level, and there are two such
+ # commits at generation 1
+ test_must_fail git rev-parse --verify v1.0.0-1-g11021982
+'
+
+test_done
--
1.7.11.1.29.gf71be5c
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>