Hi,
I have a test repo which I'm playing with. It has about 15 commits and one branch only (master) and couple of tags. Somehow it got to a state when
$ git describe
gives:
fatal: cannot describe 'SHA-1'
The command is working ok with my other repo. It doesn't seem that the test repo is corrupted. I can commit, push and pull, see the history with gitk... How can I check or repair it?
Thanks, Eugene
Re: git describe is failing
2009/10/22 Eugene Sajine <euguess@gmail.com>:
> Hi, > > I have a test repo which I'm playing with. It has about 15 commits and > one branch only (master) and couple of tags. Somehow it got to a state > when > > $ git describe > > gives: > > fatal: cannot describe 'SHA-1' > > The command is working ok with my other repo. It doesn't seem that the > test repo is corrupted. I can commit, push and pull, see the history > with gitk... How can I check or repair it? > > Thanks, > Eugene
Your tags are probably not annotated (lightweight tags), use git describe --tags.
-- Mikael Magnusson
Thomas RastRe: git describe is failing
Eugene Sajine wrote:
> $ git describe > > gives: > > fatal: cannot describe 'SHA-1'
man git-describe:
DESCRIPTION
The command finds the most recent tag that is reachable from a
commit.
[...]
By default (without --all or --tags) git describe only shows
annotated tags. For more information about creating annotated
tags see the -a and -s options to git-tag(1).If there is no such tag, it refuses to work. Annotate your tags, or try --always.
--
Thomas Rast
trast@{inf,student}.ethz.chRe: git describe is failing
> man git-describe:
>
> DESCRIPTION
> The command finds the most recent tag that is reachable from a
> commit.
> [...]
> By default (without --all or --tags) git describe only shows
> annotated tags. For more information about creating annotated
> tags see the -a and -s options to git-tag(1).
>
> If there is no such tag, it refuses to work. Annotate your tags, or
> try --always.
>
> --
> Thomas Rast
> trast@{inf,student}.ethz.ch
>Thanks! It is working ok. Although it is probably not the best error handling. I believe git should fail with some meaningful message in this case...
Thanks, Eugene
Thomas Rast[PATCH] describe: when failing, tell the user about options that work
Users seem to call git-describe without reading the manpage, and then wonder why it doesn't work with unannotated tags by default.
Make a minimal effort towards seeing if there would have been unannotated tags, and tell the user. Specifically, we say that --tags could work if we found any unannotated tags. If not, we say that --always would have given results.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Rast <trast@student.ethz.ch> ---
Eugene Sajine wrote:
> [git-describe fails if you don't have annotated tags] > > Thanks! It is working ok. > Although it is probably not the best error handling. > I believe git should fail with some meaningful message in this case...
We already had most of the information available, so hey, why not.
builtin-describe.c | 16 ++++++++++++---- 1 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/builtin-describe.c b/builtin-describe.c index 2dcfd3d..1ffa0d8 100644 --- a/builtin-describe.c +++ b/builtin-describe.c @@ -96,8 +96,6 @@ static int get_name(const char *path, const unsigned char *sha1, int flag, void if (!all) { if (!prio) return 0; - if (!tags && prio < 2) - return 0; } add_to_known_names(all ? path + 5 : path + 10, commit, prio, sha1); return 0; @@ -184,6 +182,7 @@ static void describe(const char *arg, int last_one) struct possible_tag all_matches[MAX_TAGS]; unsigned int match_cnt = 0, annotated_cnt = 0, cur_match; unsigned long seen_commits = 0; + unsigned int unannotated_cnt = 0; if (get_sha1(arg, sha1)) die("Not a valid object name %s", arg); @@ -217,7 +216,9 @@ static void describe(const char *arg, int last_one) seen_commits++; n = c->util; if (n) { - if (match_cnt < max_candidates) { + if (!tags && !all && n->prio < 2) { + unannotated_cnt++; + } else if (match_cnt < max_candidates) { struct possible_tag *t = &all_matches[match_cnt++]; t->name = n; t->depth = seen_commits - 1; @@ -259,7 +260,14 @@ static void describe(const char *arg, int last_one) printf("%s\n", find_unique_abbrev(sha1, abbrev)); return; } - die("cannot describe '%s'", sha1_to_hex(sha1)); + if (unannotated_cnt) + die("cannot describe '%s'" + " with only\nannotated tags. Try --tags.", + sha1_to_hex(sha1)); + else + die("cannot describe '%s'" + " with tags\nTry --always, or create some tags.", + sha1_to_hex(sha1)); } qsort(all_matches, match_cnt, sizeof(all_matches[0]), compare_pt);
-- 1.6.5.1.70.g1383ae
Alex RiesenRe: [PATCH] describe: when failing, tell the user about options that work
On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 17:44, Thomas Rast <trast@student.ethz.ch> wrote:
> @@ -259,7 +260,14 @@ static void describe(const char *arg, int last_one)
> printf("%s\n", find_unique_abbrev(sha1, abbrev));
> return;
> }
> - die("cannot describe '%s'", sha1_to_hex(sha1));
> + if (unannotated_cnt)
> + die("cannot describe '%s'"
> + " with only\nannotated tags. Try --tags.",
> + sha1_to_hex(sha1));
> + else
> + die("cannot describe '%s'"
> + " with tags\nTry --always, or create some tags.",
> + sha1_to_hex(sha1));These are quite verbose. Could they be conditional on something like advice.describeHints?
Junio C HamanoRe: [PATCH] describe: when failing, tell the user about options that work
Alex Riesen <raa.lkml@gmail.com> writes:
> These are quite verbose. Could they be conditional on something like > advice.describeHints?
Concurred. Please make it so.
Nicolas PitreRe: [PATCH] describe: when failing, tell the user about options that work
On Thu, 22 Oct 2009, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Alex Riesen <raa.lkml@gmail.com> writes: > > > These are quite verbose. Could they be conditional on something like > > advice.describeHints? > > Concurred. Please make it so.
I don't have a strong opinion either ways, but is having a less verbose message in the _error_ path really a big issue?
Nicolas
Junio C HamanoRe: [PATCH] describe: when failing, tell the user about options that work
Nicolas Pitre <nico@fluxnic.net> writes:
> On Thu, 22 Oct 2009, Junio C Hamano wrote: > >> Alex Riesen <raa.lkml@gmail.com> writes: >> >> > These are quite verbose. Could they be conditional on something like >> > advice.describeHints? >> >> Concurred. Please make it so. > > I don't have a strong opinion either ways, but is having a less verbose > message in the _error_ path really a big issue?
Thanks for catching a thinko---I somehow thought the patch was about warning when we give an annotated tag that is farther than an unannotated one.
It should be good enough to unconditionally give hints upon an error, as long as they are correct.
Junio C HamanoRe: [PATCH] describe: when failing, tell the user about options that work
Thomas Rast <trast@student.ethz.ch> writes:
> @@ -259,7 +260,14 @@ static void describe(const char *arg, int last_one)
> printf("%s\n", find_unique_abbrev(sha1, abbrev));
> return;
> }
> - die("cannot describe '%s'", sha1_to_hex(sha1));
> + if (unannotated_cnt)
> + die("cannot describe '%s'"
> + " with only\nannotated tags. Try --tags.",Did you mean UNannotated tags here?
> + sha1_to_hex(sha1));
> + else
> + die("cannot describe '%s'"
> + " with tags\nTry --always, or create some tags.",
> + sha1_to_hex(sha1));
> }
>
> qsort(all_matches, match_cnt, sizeof(all_matches[0]), compare_pt);Thomas RastRe: [PATCH] describe: when failing, tell the user about options that work
Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Thomas Rast <trast@student.ethz.ch> writes:
>
> > @@ -259,7 +260,14 @@ static void describe(const char *arg, int last_one)
> > printf("%s\n", find_unique_abbrev(sha1, abbrev));
> > return;
> > }
> > - die("cannot describe '%s'", sha1_to_hex(sha1));
> > + if (unannotated_cnt)
> > + die("cannot describe '%s'"
> > + " with only\nannotated tags. Try --tags.",
>
> Did you mean UNannotated tags here?No, but I think I see where the misunderstanding came from.
This code path means that we did not find a tag to describe with, but we counted some unannotated tags (and because of how the counting logic is wrapped, this only triggers when neither --all nor --tags are in effect).
So I wanted it to say "it is impossible to describe this with the tags you told me to use", which in this case are the annotated ones.
I tried to keep the general structure of the message ("cannot describe ..."), and with this restriction I can't seem to find a clearer wording. However, it could be written e.g.
No annotated tags can describe '%s'. However, there were unannotated tags: try --tags.
--
Thomas Rast
trast@{inf,student}.ethz.chJunio C HamanoRe: [PATCH] describe: when failing, tell the user about options that work
Thomas Rast <trast@student.ethz.ch> writes:
> Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> Thomas Rast <trast@student.ethz.ch> writes:
>>
>> > @@ -259,7 +260,14 @@ static void describe(const char *arg, int last_one)
>> > printf("%s\n", find_unique_abbrev(sha1, abbrev));
>> > return;
>> > }
>> > - die("cannot describe '%s'", sha1_to_hex(sha1));
>> > + if (unannotated_cnt)
>> > + die("cannot describe '%s'"
>> > + " with only\nannotated tags. Try --tags.",
>>
>> Did you mean UNannotated tags here?
>
> No, but I think I see where the misunderstanding came from.
>
> This code path means that we did not find a tag to describe with, but
> we counted some unannotated tags (and because of how the counting
> logic is wrapped, this only triggers when neither --all nor --tags are
> in effect).I think I read the code right ;-).
> So I wanted it to say "it is impossible to describe this with the tags > you told me to use", which in this case are the annotated ones.
The way I read it was "it is impossible to describe it in the way you told me to, when the tags you have are only unannotated kind."
> However, it could be written e.g. > > No annotated tags can describe '%s'. However, there were > unannotated tags: try --tags.
Sounds better.
Thomas Rast[PATCH v2] describe: when failing, tell the user about options that work
Users seem to call git-describe without reading the manpage, and then wonder why it doesn't work with unannotated tags by default.
Make a minimal effort towards seeing if there would have been unannotated tags, and tell the user. Specifically, we say that --tags could work if we found any unannotated tags. If not, we say that --always would have given results.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Rast <trast@student.ethz.ch> ---
Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Thomas Rast <trast@student.ethz.ch> writes: > > However, it could be written e.g. > > > > No annotated tags can describe '%s'. However, there were > > unannotated tags: try --tags. > > Sounds better.
Then let's make it so. Sorry for taking so long.
builtin-describe.c | 16 ++++++++++++---- 1 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/builtin-describe.c b/builtin-describe.c index 2dcfd3d..4ea6f88 100644 --- a/builtin-describe.c +++ b/builtin-describe.c @@ -96,8 +96,6 @@ static int get_name(const char *path, const unsigned char *sha1, int flag, void if (!all) { if (!prio) return 0; - if (!tags && prio < 2) - return 0; } add_to_known_names(all ? path + 5 : path + 10, commit, prio, sha1); return 0; @@ -184,6 +182,7 @@ static void describe(const char *arg, int last_one) struct possible_tag all_matches[MAX_TAGS]; unsigned int match_cnt = 0, annotated_cnt = 0, cur_match; unsigned long seen_commits = 0; + unsigned int unannotated_cnt = 0; if (get_sha1(arg, sha1)) die("Not a valid object name %s", arg); @@ -217,7 +216,9 @@ static void describe(const char *arg, int last_one) seen_commits++; n = c->util; if (n) { - if (match_cnt < max_candidates) { + if (!tags && !all && n->prio < 2) { + unannotated_cnt++; + } else if (match_cnt < max_candidates) { struct possible_tag *t = &all_matches[match_cnt++]; t->name = n; t->depth = seen_commits - 1; @@ -259,7 +260,14 @@ static void describe(const char *arg, int last_one) printf("%s\n", find_unique_abbrev(sha1, abbrev)); return; } - die("cannot describe '%s'", sha1_to_hex(sha1)); + if (unannotated_cnt) + die("No annotated tags can describe '%s'.\n" + "However, there were unannotated tags: try --tags.", + sha1_to_hex(sha1)); + else + die("No tags can describe '%s'.\n" + "Try --always, or create some tags.", + sha1_to_hex(sha1)); } qsort(all_matches, match_cnt, sizeof(all_matches[0]), compare_pt);
-- 1.6.5.1.161.g3b9c0