Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] automatically ban strcpy()

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Jul 27, 2018, 17:34 UTC
Message-ID: <xmqq8t5woa5f.fsf@gitster-ct.c.googlers.com>
In-Reply-To: <20180727080807.GA11932@sigill.intra.peff.net>

Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:

Show 11 quoted lines

>>  $ git rebase --onto HEAD @{-1}~3 @{-1}^0
>
> Interesting. I'd have probably done it with an interactive rebase:
>
>   $ git rebase -i HEAD~4
>   [change first "pick" to "edit"; after stopping...]
>   $ git reset --hard HEAD^ ;# throw away patch 1
>   $ git am -s mbox         ;# apply single patch
>   $ git rebase --continue
>
> Which is really the same thing,...

I have unfounded fear for doing anything other than "edit", "commit --amend", "rebase --continue", or "rebase --abort" during a "rebase -i" session.

Especiallly "reset --hard" with anything but HEAD. I guess that is because I do not fully trust/understand how the sequencer machinery replays the remainder of todo tasks on top of the HEAD that is different from what it left me to futz with when it relinquished the control.

Also "am" during "rebase -i" is scary to me, as "am" also tries to keep its own sequencing state. Do you know if "rebase --continue" would work correctly in the above sequence if "am" conflicted, I gave up, and said "am --abort", for example? I don't offhand know.