Re: [PATCH v2] log -G: Ignore binary files

> Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> hat am 29. November 2018 um 08:10 geschrieben:
> 
> 
> Thomas Braun <thomas.braun@virtuell-zuhause.de> writes:
> 
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] log -G: Ignore binary files
> 
> s/Ig/ig/; (will locally munge--this alone is no reason to reroll).

> > diff --git a/t/t4209-log-pickaxe.sh b/t/t4209-log-pickaxe.sh
> > index 844df760f7..5c3e2a16b2 100755
> > --- a/t/t4209-log-pickaxe.sh
> > +++ b/t/t4209-log-pickaxe.sh
> > @@ -106,4 +106,44 @@ test_expect_success 'log -S --no-textconv (missing textconv tool)' '
> >  	rm .gitattributes
> >  '
> >  
> > +test_expect_success 'log -G ignores binary files' '
> > +	git checkout --orphan orphan1 &&
> > +	printf "a\0a" >data.bin &&
> > +	git add data.bin &&
> > +	git commit -m "message" &&
> > +	git log -Ga >result &&
> > +	test_must_be_empty result
> > +'
> 
> As this is the first mention of data.bin, this is adding a new file
> data.bin that has two 'a' but is a binary file.  And that is the
> only commit in the history leading to orphan1.
> 
> The fact that "log -Ga" won't find any means it missed the creation
> event, because the blob is binary.  Good.
> 
> > +test_expect_success 'log -G looks into binary files with -a' '
> > +	git checkout --orphan orphan2 &&
> > +	printf "a\0a" >data.bin &&
> > +	git add data.bin &&
> > +	git commit -m "message" &&
> 
> This starts from the state left by the previous test piece, i.e. we
> have a binary data.bin file with two 'a' in it.  We pretend to
> modify and add, but these two steps are no-op if the previous
> succeeded, but even if the previous step failed, we get what we want
> in the data.bin file.  And then we make an initial commit the same
> way.
> 
> > +	git log -a -Ga >actual &&
> > +	git log >expected &&
> 
> And we ran the same test but this time with "-a" to tell Git that
> binary-ness should not matter.  It will find the sole commit.  Good.
> 
> > +	test_cmp actual expected
> > +'
> > +
> > +test_expect_success 'log -G looks into binary files with textconv filter' '
> > +	git checkout --orphan orphan3 &&
> > +	echo "* diff=bin" > .gitattributes &&
> 
> s/> />/; (will locally munge--this alone is no reason to reroll).

> > +	printf "a\0a" >data.bin &&
> > +	git add data.bin &&
> > +	git commit -m "message" &&
> > +	git -c diff.bin.textconv=cat log -Ga >actual &&
> 
> This exposes a slight iffy-ness in the design.  The textconv filter
> used here does not strip the "binary-ness" from the payload, but it
> is enough to tell the machinery that -G should look into the
> difference.  Is that really desirable, though?
> 
> IOW, if this weren't the initial commit (which is handled by the
> codepath to special-case creation and deletion in diff_grep()
> function), would "log -Ga" show it without "-a"?  Should it?

> I think this test piece (and probably the previous ones for "-a" vs
> "no -a" without textconv, as well) should be using a history with
> three commits, where
> 
>     - the root commit introduces "a\0a" to data.bin (creation event)
> 
>     - the second commit adds another instance of "a\0a" to data.bin
>       (forces comparison)
> 
>     - the third commit removes data.bin (deletion event)
> 
> and make sure that the three are treated identically.  If "log -Ga"
> finds one (with the combination of other conditions like use of
> textconv or -a option), it should find all three, and vice versa.

> > +	git log >expected &&
> > +	test_cmp actual expected
> > +'
> > +
> > +test_expect_success 'log -S looks into binary files' '
> > +	git checkout --orphan orphan4 &&
> > +	printf "a\0a" >data.bin &&
> > +	git add data.bin &&
> > +	git commit -m "message" &&
> > +	git log -Sa >actual &&
> > +	git log >expected &&
> > +	test_cmp actual expected
> > +'
> 
> Likewise.  This would also benefit from a three-commit history.
> 
> Perhaps you can create such a history at the beginning of these
> additions as another "setup -G/-S binary test" step and test
> different variations in subsequent tests without the setup?