Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] commit-graph.c: no lazy fetch in lookup_commit_in_graph()
- From
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
- Date
- Jun 30, 2022, 15:40 UTC
- Message-ID
- <xmqq5ykignwb.fsf@gitster.g>
- In-Reply-To
- <220630.86v8siclh5.gmgdl@evledraar.gmail.com>
Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com> writes:
Show 33 quoted lines
> On Thu, Jun 30 2022, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > >> Hi Junio, >> >> On Tue, 28 Jun 2022, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> >>> Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com> writes: >>> >>> >> +test_expect_success 'setup: prepare a repository with commit-graph contains the commit' ' >>> >> + git init with-commit-graph && >>> >> + echo "$(pwd)/with-commit/.git/objects" \ >>> >> + >with-commit-graph/.git/objects/info/alternates && >>> > >>> > nit: you can use $PWD instead of $(pwd). >>> >>> We can, and it would not make any difference on non-Windows. >>> >>> But which one should we use to cater to Windows? $(pwd) is a full >>> path in Windows notation "C:\Program Files\Git\..." while $PWD is >>> MSYS style "/C/Program Files/Git/..." or something like that, IIRC? >> >> Indeed, and since the `alternates` file is supposed to be read by >> `git.exe`, a non-MSYS program, the original was good, and the nit >> suggested the incorrect form. > > I looked at t5615-alternate-env.sh which does the equivalent of: > > GIT_ALTERNATE_OBJECT_DIRECTORIES="$PWD/one.git/objects:$PWD/two.git/objects" \ > git cat-file [...] > > We run that test on all our platforms, does the $PWD form work in the > environment variable, but not when we write it to the "alternates" file? > Or is there some other subtlety there that I'm missing?
I am also curious to see a clear and concise explanation so that we do not have to repeat this discussion later. We have
- When a test checks for an absolute path that a git command generated, construct the expected value using $(pwd) rather than $PWD, $TEST_DIRECTORY, or $TRASH_DIRECTORY. It makes a difference on Windows, where the shell (MSYS bash) mangles absolute path names. For details, see the commit message of 4114156ae9.
in t/README, but even with the log mesasge of 4114156a (Tests on Windows: $(pwd) must return Windows-style paths, 2009-03-13) [*1*], I have no idea what makes the thing you found in t5615 work and your suggestion to use $PWD in the new one not work.
GIT_ALTERNATE_OBJECT_DIRECTORIES is a PATH_SEP (not necessarily a colon) separated list, and I think the way t5615 uses it is broken on Windows where PATH_SEP is defined as semicolon without the $PWD vs $(pwd) issue. Is the test checking the right thing?
[Footnote]
*1*
Tests on Windows: $(pwd) must return Windows-style paths
Many tests pass $(pwd) in some form to git and later test that the output
of git contains the correct value of $(pwd). For example, the test of
'git remote show' sets up a remote that contains $(pwd) and then the
expected result must contain $(pwd). Again, MSYS-bash's path mangling kicks in: Plain $(pwd) uses the MSYS style
absolute path /c/path/to/git. The test case would write this name into
the 'expect' file. But when git is invoked, MSYS-bash converts this name to
the Windows style path c:/path/to/git, and git would produce this form in
the result; the test would fail. We fix this by passing -W to bash's pwd that produces the Windows-style
path.There are a two cases that need an accompanying change:
- In t1504 the value of $(pwd) becomes part of a path list. In this case,
the lone 'c' in something like /foo:c:/path/to/git:/bar inhibits
MSYS-bashes path mangling; IOW in this case we want the /c/path/to/git
form to allow path mangling. We use $PWD instead of $(pwd), which always
has the latter form. - In t6200, $(pwd) - the Windows style path - must be used to construct the
expected result because that is the path form that git sees. (The change
in the test itself is just for consistency: 'git fetch' always sees the
Windows-style path, with or without the change.)Signed-off-by: Johannes Sixt <j6t@kdbg.org>