Re: When exactly should REBASE_HEAD exist?

> On 02.03.23 21:27, Stefan Haller wrote:
>> On 02.03.23 11:19, Phillip Wood wrote:
>>> On 28/02/2023 12:55, Stefan Haller wrote:
>>>> The reason why I am asking this is: I'm using lazygit, which, during
>>>> interactive rebases, shows a combined view of the real commits that were
>>>> already applied, and the remaining commits that are yet to be applied
>>>> (it gets these by parsing rebase-merge/git-rebase-todo); something like
>>>> this, when I set the 2nd commit to "edit":
>>>>
>>>>     pick   4th commit
>>>>     pick   3rd commit
>>>>            2nd commit  <-- YOU ARE HERE
>>>>            1st commit
>>>>
>>>> This is great, but assuming that the 2nd commit conflicted, currently
>>>> the display looks like this:
>>>>
>>>>     pick   4th commit
>>>>     pick   3rd commit
>>>>            1st commit  <-- YOU ARE HERE
>>>>
>>>> I would like to extend this to also show a "fake entry" for the commit
>>>> that conflicted, if there is one. REBASE_HEAD is perfect for this,
>>>> except that I need a way to distinguish whether it was applied already
>>>> or not.
>>>
>>> Can you check the index for conflicts when the rebase stops?
>>
>> I could do that, but then the fake entry would go away as soon as I have
>> staged all conflict resolutions. I would find it useful for it to stay
>> visible in that case, until I continue the rebase.
> 
> It seems that I can get close by checking whether the file
> .git/rebase-merge/amend exists. If it does, the current patch was
> applied already, and I don't show the fake entry. If it doesn't, we
> still need to commit the changes from REBASE-HEAD, so it makes sense to
> show it in the list.
> 
> Does this sound like a reasonable approach? I must admit that the code
> in sequencer.c is too complex for me to tell at a glance whether there
> are situations where this heuristic would do the wrong thing.