[PATCH 2/2] Fix for git-rev-list --merge-order B ^A (A,B share common base)
- From
Jon Seymour <jon.seymour@gmail.com>
- Date
- Jun 29, 2005, 23:45 UTC
- Message-ID
- <20050629234533.28709.qmail@blackcubes.dyndns.org>
This patch makes --merge-order produce the same list as git-rev-list without --merge-order specified.
In particular, if the graph looks like this:
A | B |/ C | D
The both git-rev-list B ^A and git-rev-list --merge-order will produce B.
The unit test changes in this patch remove use of the --show-breaks flags from certain unit tests. The changed --merge-order behaviour changed the annotation that --show-breaks prints for certain test cases. The new behaviour is reasonable and irrelevant to the intent of the tests so that tests have been changed to eliminate the spurious behaviour.
Signed-off-by: Jon Seymour <jon.seymour@gmail.com> ---
epoch.c | 8 +++----- t/t6001-rev-list-merge-order.sh | 36 ++++++++++++++++++------------------ 2 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)
26783f6660e58cc2e988b92050707a6a417cc6ae
diff --git a/epoch.c b/epoch.c --- a/epoch.c +++ b/epoch.c @@ -585,11 +585,9 @@ int sort_list_in_merge_order(struct comm for (; list; list = list->next) { struct commit *next = list->item; - if (!(next->object.flags & UNINTERESTING)) { - if (!(next->object.flags & DUPCHECK)) { - next->object.flags |= DUPCHECK; - commit_list_insert(list->item, &reversed); - } + if (!(next->object.flags & DUPCHECK)) { + next->object.flags |= DUPCHECK; + commit_list_insert(list->item, &reversed); } } diff --git a/t/t6001-rev-list-merge-order.sh b/t/t6001-rev-list-merge-order.sh --- a/t/t6001-rev-list-merge-order.sh +++ b/t/t6001-rev-list-merge-order.sh @@ -366,34 +366,34 @@ test_output_expect_success "three nodes = root EOF -test_output_expect_success "linear prune l2 ^root" 'git-rev-list --merge-order --show-breaks l2 ^root' <<EOF -= l2 -| l1 -| l0 +test_output_expect_success "linear prune l2 ^root" 'git-rev-list --merge-order l2 ^root' <<EOF +l2 +l1 +l0 EOF -test_output_expect_success "linear prune l2 ^l0" 'git-rev-list --merge-order --show-breaks l2 ^l0' <<EOF -= l2 -| l1 +test_output_expect_success "linear prune l2 ^l0" 'git-rev-list --merge-order l2 ^l0' <<EOF +l2 +l1 EOF -test_output_expect_success "linear prune l2 ^l1" 'git-rev-list --merge-order --show-breaks l2 ^l1' <<EOF -= l2 +test_output_expect_success "linear prune l2 ^l1" 'git-rev-list --merge-order l2 ^l1' <<EOF +l2 EOF -test_output_expect_success "linear prune l5 ^a4" 'git-rev-list --merge-order --show-breaks l5 ^a4' <<EOF -= l5 -| l4 -| l3 +test_output_expect_success "linear prune l5 ^a4" 'git-rev-list --merge-order l5 ^a4' <<EOF +l5 +l4 +l3 EOF -test_output_expect_success "linear prune l5 ^l3" 'git-rev-list --merge-order --show-breaks l5 ^l3' <<EOF -= l5 -| l4 +test_output_expect_success "linear prune l5 ^l3" 'git-rev-list --merge-order l5 ^l3' <<EOF +l5 +l4 EOF -test_output_expect_success "linear prune l5 ^l4" 'git-rev-list --merge-order --show-breaks l5 ^l4' <<EOF -= l5 +test_output_expect_success "linear prune l5 ^l4" 'git-rev-list --merge-order l5 ^l4' <<EOF +l5 EOF test_output_expect_success "max-count 10 - merge order" 'git-rev-list --merge-order --show-breaks --max-count=10 l5' <<EOF ------------