Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] fast-export: make sure refs are updated properly

From: Sverre Rabbelier <srabbelier@gmail.com>
Date: Oct 30, 2012, 21:59 UTC
Message-ID: <CAGdFq_h3L-1rPvb=dSYeXqEea+f+g2kRHp7aAjaU-AxjZHB7dQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAMP44s2QwdZKqJq0BZ5HOtZYiCMxCxycui9EmxxfL+Sa6M_6+g@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 2:35 PM, Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com> wrote:

Show 10 quoted lines

> On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 10:17 PM, Sverre Rabbelier <srabbelier@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 11:47 AM, Felipe Contreras
>> <felipe.contreras@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Why would it? We are not changing the way objects are exported, the
>>> only difference is what happens at the end
>>> (handle_tags_and_duplicates()).
>>
>> Because the marking is per-commit, not per-ref, right?
>
> Oh, you meant using marks?

No, I meant the 'SHOWN' flag, doesn't it get added per commit, not per ref? That is, commit->object.flags & SHOWN refers to the object underlying the ref. So I suspect this scenario doesn't pass the tests:

git init && echo first > content && git add content && git commit -m "first" && git branch first && echo two > content && git commit -m "second" && git branch second && git fast-export first > actual && test_cmp actual expected_first && git fast-export second > actual && test_cmp actual expected_second

With expected_first being something like: <fast-export stream with the first commit> <reset command to set first to the right commit>

And expected_second being something like <fast export stream with the first and second command> <reset command to set first and second to their respective branches>

-- 
Cheers,

Sverre Rabbelier