Re: identical hashes on two branches, but holes in git log

From: Philippe De Muyter <phdm@macq.eu>
Date: May 20, 2015, 13:13 UTC
Message-ID: <20150520131359.GA7043@frolo.macqel>
In-Reply-To: <20150519233925.GA22748@peff.net>

Hi Jeff,

On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 07:39:25PM -0400, Jeff King wrote:

Show 34 quoted lines

> On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 03:29:58PM +0200, Philippe De Muyter wrote:
> 
> > Trying to understand, I have eventually done "git log" on my branch and
> > on v3.15 with the following commands :
> > 
> > git log v3.15 --full-history --decorate=short | grep '^commit' > /tmp/3.15.commits
> > git log --full-history --decorate=short | grep '^commit' > /tmp/mybranch.commits
> > 
> > I compare then the two histories with
> > 
> > diff -u /tmp/3.15.commits /tmp/mybranch.commits
> > 
> > and I get (excerpt) :
> > 
> > --- /tmp/3.15.commits      2015-05-19 13:19:59.665205514 +0200
> > +++ /tmp/mybranch.commits     2015-05-19 13:19:52.452081328 +0200
> > @@ -1,3780 +1,84 @@
> > -commit 1860e379875dfe7271c649058aeddffe5afd9d0d (tag: v3.15)
> > -commit ...
> > ...
> > -commit fad01e866afdbe01a1f3ec06a39c3a8b9e197014 (tag: v3.15-rc8)
> > ...
> > ...
> > -commit c9eaa447e77efe77b7fa4c953bd62de8297fd6c5 (tag: v3.15-rc1)
> > ...
> > -commit 57673c2b0baa900dddae3b9eb3d7748ebf550eb3
> > +commit a1fb433346cb5733945b5fc243f7334744bae4fd (HEAD, macq_boards-3.14.0)
> > +commit ...
> > ...
> > +commit 2be7b20bbb337e0031e0f0d39c9a4845b6bbf3b8
> 
> It looks like v3.15 is ahead of your branch. And I _think_ your question
> is: since they both contain v3.14, shouldn't they also contain all of
> the ancestors of v3.14?

Thanks for understanding and clarifying my question.

Show 14 quoted lines

> 
> The answer is yes. But from your output here:
> 
> >  commit 455c6fdbd219161bd09b1165f11699d6d73de11c (tag: v3.14)	==== identical commit
> > -commit c32fc9c803f8ed90a7548810de48ca33a3020168		==== commit missing in my branch
> >  commit fedc1ed0f11be666de066b0c78443254736a942e		==== more identical commits
> 
> I think what you are saying is: c32fc9c803 comes after v3.14, so it
> should be an ancestor, right?
> 
> And the answer is no. Git's traversal order does not necessarily reflect
> the true topology if you have multiple lines of development. And in this
> case, they do not have a direct ancestry relationship (i.e., they are on
> separate branches, and neither is an ancestor of the other).

Thanks for the explanation. Would that also be true (that unrelated commits could come in the output) with a simple 'git log' ?

My initial problem (still unresolved/unanswered) is that some commits that appeared between v3.14-rc1 and v3.14-rc2 (specifically 817c27a128e18aed840adc295f988e1656fed7d1) are present in v3.15, but not in my branch.

I have just checked online the v3.14 version on

http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/log/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6qdl.dtsi

and I see also the same "problem": the commit removing 738 lines is in the log 817c27a128e18aed840adc295f988e1656fed7d1 "ARM: dts: imx6qdl: make pinctrl nodes board specific", but the v3.14 version of the file still contains the 738 removed line, and I see no commit restoring those lines.

I do not understand why those 738 lines are still present in v3.14 although they were removed between v3.14-rc1 and v3.14-rc2 :(

Philippe