Re: tig show <commit> not working anymore?

From: Kumar Appaiah <a.kumar@alumni.iitm.ac.in>
Date: Sep 18, 2010, 05:01 UTC
Message-ID: <20100918050122.GA24656@bluemoon.alumni.iitm.ac.in>
In-Reply-To: <4C922112.404@drmicha.warpmail.net>

On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 03:52:18PM +0200, Michael J Gruber wrote:

Show 14 quoted lines

> > I observed that, since commit
> > 53c089443cd9885fa677becee4bf7ffd56c3c357, tig show <commit> doesn't
> > seem to work the same way as I had expected it to. The documentation
> > update doesn't seem to indicate that this was to be expected (or I
> > didn't understand it properly). Could someone please confirm that
> > tig show <commit> should actually do something similar to git show <commit> | tig ?
> 
> It seems that since that tig commit, "tig show <commit>" shows HEAD
> rather than <commit>. OTOH, "tig <commit>" does navigate to <commit>.
> 
> The reason is that tig passes %(commit), not %(revargs), to git show for
> the "show" subcommand, but the obvious simple patch breaks diff view. I
> guess somewhere in the codepath one has to differentiate between those.
> cc'ing Mr. Tig...

Please bear in mind that I am totally new to the code, and not a power user of git either. So please don't club me! ;-)

Well, I was exploring the code a little, and I could not understand some aspects fully. First, I discovered that the following hack fixes the problem to an extent:

diff --git a/tig.c b/tig.c
index e0e812c..aa38e71 100644
--- a/tig.c
+++ b/tig.c
@@ -7864,7 +7864,7 @@ parse_options(int argc, const char *argv[])

        if (filter_argv)
                filter_options(filter_argv);
-
+       if (!strcmp(subcommand, "show") && opt_rev_args && opt_rev_args[0]) { string_copy_rev(ref_commit, opt_rev_args[0]); }
        return request;
 }

However, I am pretty certain that that is not the intended use of
opt_rev_args and ref_commit, and that they should be used in a
different way. For example, tig show HEAD^^^..HEAD should show me
three commits combined, but it shows me only one, since I haven't run
it through rev-list or the like¸ probably.

I'll continue to try getting at a fix, unless someone comes to it
before me.

Thanks!

Kumar