Re: git-visualize(1) plumbing equivalent

From: D. Ben Knoble <ben.knoble@gmail.com>
Date: Oct 3, 2026, 13:45 UTC
Message-ID: <CALnO6CCUY2KF8rEotihdVNy+D10mmzuW0RXbH8nqhSS9jsgQUg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <asDTWsH-RuIJOyne@debian>

On Sat, Oct 3, 2026 at 6:13 AM Alejandro Colomar <alx@kernel.org> wrote:

Show 13 quoted lines

>
> Hi!
>
> I have this code, which I use to loop in a script using git-bisect(1):
>
>         while
>                 git bisect visualize --oneline \
>                 | wc -l \
>                 | xargs -I{} test {} -gt 1;
>         do
>                 if
>                         git rebase $gropts BISECT_HEAD >/dev/null 2>/dev/null;
>                         test $? -eq 0;

Aside: this "test $? -eq 0" is a bit redundant, no? "if cmd" in shell
works by checking whether "cmd" exits 0 or not.

Show 26 quoted lines

>                 then
>                         echo 'Rebase: success';
>                         git bisect good BISECT_HEAD;
>                 else
>                         echo 'Rebase: conflict';
>                         git rebase --abort >/dev/null;
>                         git bisect bad BISECT_HEAD;
>                 fi;
>         done;
>
> (
> I know this resembles "git rebase run", but I'm avoiding it, because
> passing all of that as a command is non-trivial (and I'd like to avoid
> having to write a separate script to pass its name to "git bisect run").
> )
>
> Having read the documentation for git-bisect(1), visualize reads several
> environment variables, and thus this code doesn't seem robust.  What
> would be the plumbing version of the while-loop condition?
>
>                 git bisect visualize --oneline \
>                 | wc -l \
>                 | xargs -I{} test {} -gt 1;
>
> The goal is to know whether git-bisect(1) has found a commit yet or not,
> to stop looping.

I think you are probably looking for the (size of the) set of commits between bisect/bad and all the bisect/good-* refs. So you might need to "git refs list" the good ones, and feed those as negated refs alongside bisect/bad to rev-list?

In the general case, that wouldn't account for skipped commits as I understand it, where multiple commits are left at the end of the bisect, but in your script it doesn't look like you skip any.

-- 
D. Ben Knoble