threads / discuss / 42933

git cherry-pick conflict error message is deceptive when cherry-picking multiple commits

Subject: git cherry-pick conflict error message is deceptive when cherry-picking multiple commits

## tl;dr

9 messages between Jul 26, 2016 and Aug 10, 2016.

replies: 8people: 4as markdown or json

Stephen Morton· Jul 26, 2016, 19:40 UTC · lore

When I cherry-pick n commits and one of the first (n-1), fails, what I should do is resolve the conflict, 'git add' it, and then run 'git cherry-pick --continue'. However git advises me to

error: could not apply d0fb756... Commit message for test commit hint: after resolving the conflicts, mark the corrected paths hint: with 'git add <paths>' or 'git rm <paths>' hint: and commit the result with 'git commit'

I suspect this is not just a little bit deceptive but actually a bit destructive, as doing a 'git commit' removes some of the sequencing information. If I do a 'git commit', while there is .git/sequencer information and 'git cherry-pick --continue' will work, there is no indication in 'git status' that a cherry-pick is in progress.

It would be extremely easy for somebody to follow cherry-pick's hints by running 'git commit' and think that they were done, not realizing that there were m more commits remaining to be cherry-picked.

Would it be possible to expand the hint message to tell users to run 'git cherry-pick --continue'

This patch is *not* meant as a serious patch for submission --I'm sure it's all wrong-- it's just a proof of concept and showing some goodwill on my part that I'm trying to help and I'm willing to put in some work if I can be pointed more in the right direction.

Regards, Stephen

diff --git a/sequencer.c b/sequencer.c
index cdfac82..b8fa534 100644
--- a/sequencer.c
+++ b/sequencer.c
@@ -171,14 +171,21 @@ static void print_advice(int show_hint, struct
replay_opts *opts)

        if (show_hint) {
                if (opts->no_commit)
                        advise(_("after resolving the conflicts, mark
the corrected paths\n"
                                 "with 'git add <paths>' or 'git rm <paths>'"));
-               else
-                       advise(_("after resolving the conflicts, mark
the corrected paths\n"
-                                "with 'git add <paths>' or 'git rm <paths>'\n"
-                                "and commit the result with 'git commit'"));
+               else if  (! file_exists(git_path_seq_dir())) {
+                       advise(_("SCM: after resolving the conflicts,
mark the corrected paths\n"
+                     "with 'git add <paths>' or 'git rm <paths>'\n"
+                     "and commit the result with 'git commit'"));
+        }
+        else
+        {
+            advise(_("SCM: after resolving the conflicts, mark the
corrected paths\n"
+                     "with 'git add <paths>' or 'git rm <paths>'\n"
+                     "and continue the %s with 'git %s --continue'"),
action_name(opts), action_name(opts));
+        }
        }
 }
Stefan Beller· Jul 26, 2016, 20:18 UTC · re: Stephen Morton · lore

Re: git cherry-pick conflict error message is deceptive when cherry-picking multiple commits

> Would it be possible to expand the hint message to tell users to run
> 'git cherry-pick --continue'
Instead of expanding I'd go for replacing?

I'd say the user is tempted for 2 choices, a) aborting (for various reasons) b) fix and continue.

So we'd want to point out the way for those two ways and not give an additional arbitrary way that is not quite (b) but goes that direction?

I realize this is what the patch does, but I wanted to point out the difference on expanding vs replacing. I think a 4 line hint is "enough", so I'd object adding more lines, but changing existing lines is great!

Jeff King· Jul 26, 2016, 20:30 UTC · re: Stefan Beller · lore

Re: git cherry-pick conflict error message is deceptive when cherry-picking multiple commits

On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 01:18:55PM -0700, Stefan Beller wrote:
Show 8 quoted lines
> > Would it be possible to expand the hint message to tell users to run
> > 'git cherry-pick --continue'
> 
> Instead of expanding I'd go for replacing?
> 
> I'd say the user is tempted for 2 choices,
> a) aborting (for various reasons)
> b) fix and continue.
Yeah, I'd agree with this.

I think that advice comes from a time when you could only cherry-pick a single commit. These days you can do several in a single run, and that's why "git cherry-pick --continue" was invented.

So I think we would need to make sure that the "cherry-pick --continue" advice applies in both cases (and that we do not need to give different advice depending on whether we are in a single or multiple cherry-pick).

I did some basic tests and it _seems_ to work to use --continue in either case. Probably due to 093a309 (revert: allow cherry-pick --continue to commit before resuming, 2011-12-10), but I didn't dig.

-Peff
Stephen Morton· Jul 26, 2016, 20:44 UTC · re: Jeff King · lore

Re: git cherry-pick conflict error message is deceptive when cherry-picking multiple commits

On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 4:30 PM, Jeff King <peff@peff.net> wrote:
Show 26 quoted lines
> On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 01:18:55PM -0700, Stefan Beller wrote:
>
>> > Would it be possible to expand the hint message to tell users to run
>> > 'git cherry-pick --continue'
>>
>> Instead of expanding I'd go for replacing?
>>
>> I'd say the user is tempted for 2 choices,
>> a) aborting (for various reasons)
>> b) fix and continue.
>
> Yeah, I'd agree with this.
>
> I think that advice comes from a time when you could only cherry-pick a
> single commit. These days you can do several in a single run, and that's
> why "git cherry-pick --continue" was invented.
>
> So I think we would need to make sure that the "cherry-pick --continue"
> advice applies in both cases (and that we do not need to give different
> advice depending on whether we are in a single or multiple cherry-pick).
>
> I did some basic tests and it _seems_ to work to use --continue in
> either case. Probably due to 093a309 (revert: allow cherry-pick
> --continue to commit before resuming, 2011-12-10), but I didn't dig.
>
> -Peff
The 'git status' text for a rebase/am/cherry-pick is
    fix conflicts and then run "git <op> --continue"
    use "git <op> --skip" to skip this patch"
    use "git <op> --abort" to cancel the <op> operation
(The --cancel text varies a bit actually, but that's the gist of it.)

The rebase/cherry-pick conflict case should really indicate how to mark the conflict as resolved as that's the specific situation the user is in. I don't know if there are guidelines to hint line length, or how many actions should be on one line but if the above text was changed to have this as the "fix" text, possibly over two lines, I think that would do it.

    fix conflicts with 'git add <paths>' or 'git rm <paths>'" and then
run "git <op> --continue"
Stephen
Stephen Morton· Jul 27, 2016, 14:15 UTC · re: Stephen Morton · lore

Re: git cherry-pick conflict error message is deceptive when cherry-picking multiple commits

Here is my patch then. (Personally, I would add some capitalization and punctuation, but I didn't see much of that in the existing code.) I'm not a regular pull-requester, do I do that, or can somebody else handle that for me?

diff --git a/sequencer.c b/sequencer.c
index cdfac82..ce06876 100644
--- a/sequencer.c
+++ b/sequencer.c
@@ -176,7 +176,8 @@ static void print_advice(int show_hint, struct
replay_opts *opts)
                else
                        advise(_("after resolving the conflicts, mark
the corrected paths\n"
                                 "with 'git add <paths>' or 'git rm <paths>'\n"
-                                "and commit the result with 'git commit'"));
+                                "then continue the %s with 'git %s
--continue'\n"
+                                "or cancel the %s operation with 'git
%s --abort'" ),  action_name(opts), action_name(opts),
action_name(opts), action_name(opts));
        }
 }


Stephen



On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 4:44 PM, Stephen Morton
<stephen.c.morton@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 4:30 PM, Jeff King <peff@peff.net> wrote:
>> On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 01:18:55PM -0700, Stefan Beller wrote:
>>
>>> > Would it be possible to expand the hint message to tell users to run
>>> > 'git cherry-pick --continue'
>>>
>>> Instead of expanding I'd go for replacing?
>>>
>>> I'd say the user is tempted for 2 choices,
>>> a) aborting (for various reasons)
>>> b) fix and continue.
>>
>> Yeah, I'd agree with this.
>>
>> I think that advice comes from a time when you could only cherry-pick a
>> single commit. These days you can do several in a single run, and that's
>> why "git cherry-pick --continue" was invented.
>>
>> So I think we would need to make sure that the "cherry-pick --continue"
>> advice applies in both cases (and that we do not need to give different
>> advice depending on whether we are in a single or multiple cherry-pick).
>>
>> I did some basic tests and it _seems_ to work to use --continue in
>> either case. Probably due to 093a309 (revert: allow cherry-pick
>> --continue to commit before resuming, 2011-12-10), but I didn't dig.
>>
>> -Peff
>
> The 'git status' text for a rebase/am/cherry-pick is
>
>     fix conflicts and then run "git <op> --continue"
>     use "git <op> --skip" to skip this patch"
>     use "git <op> --abort" to cancel the <op> operation
>
> (The --cancel text varies a bit actually, but that's the gist of it.)
>
> The rebase/cherry-pick conflict case should really indicate how to
> mark the conflict as resolved as that's the specific situation the
> user is in. I don't know if there are guidelines to hint line length,
> or how many actions should be on one line but if the above text was
> changed to have this as the "fix" text, possibly over two lines, I
> think that would do it.
>
>     fix conflicts with 'git add <paths>' or 'git rm <paths>'" and then
> run "git <op> --continue"
>
> Stephen
Johannes Schindelin· Jul 27, 2016, 15:03 UTC · re: Stephen Morton · lore

Re: git cherry-pick conflict error message is deceptive when cherry-picking multiple commits

Hi Stephen,
On Wed, 27 Jul 2016, Stephen Morton wrote:
> Here is my patch then. (Personally, I would add some capitalization and
> punctuation, but I didn't see much of that in the existing code.) I'm
> not a regular pull-requester, do I do that, or can somebody else handle
> that for me?

The process of the patch submission is described in Documentation/SubmittingPatches (yes, it is a bit involved, and it is slightly easier when you use http://submitgit.herokuapp.com/, but please note that this process has served us well over one decade).

Please also note that top-posting is highly discouraged on this list:
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
>Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
>>A: Top-posting.
>>>Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?
Now to your patch:
Show 16 quoted lines
> diff --git a/sequencer.c b/sequencer.c
> index cdfac82..ce06876 100644
> --- a/sequencer.c
> +++ b/sequencer.c
> @@ -176,7 +176,8 @@ static void print_advice(int show_hint, struct
> replay_opts *opts)
>                 else
>                         advise(_("after resolving the conflicts, mark
> the corrected paths\n"
>                                  "with 'git add <paths>' or 'git rm <paths>'\n"
> -                                "and commit the result with 'git commit'"));
> +                                "then continue the %s with 'git %s
> --continue'\n"
> +                                "or cancel the %s operation with 'git
> %s --abort'" ),  action_name(opts), action_name(opts),
> action_name(opts), action_name(opts));

That is an awful lot of repetition right there, with an added inconsistency that the action is referred to by its name alone in the "--continue" case, but with "operation" added in the "--abort" case.

And additionally, in the most common case (one commit to cherry-pick), the advice now suggests a more complicated operation than necessary: a simply `git commit` would be enough, then.

Can't we have a test whether this is the last of the commits to be cherry-picked, and if so, have the simpler advice again?

Ciao, Johannes

Stephen Morton· Jul 27, 2016, 15:30 UTC · re: Johannes Schindelin · lore

Re: git cherry-pick conflict error message is deceptive when cherry-picking multiple commits

On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 11:03 AM, Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> wrote:

Show 53 quoted lines
> Hi Stephen,
>
> On Wed, 27 Jul 2016, Stephen Morton wrote:
>
>> Here is my patch then. (Personally, I would add some capitalization and
>> punctuation, but I didn't see much of that in the existing code.) I'm
>> not a regular pull-requester, do I do that, or can somebody else handle
>> that for me?
>
> The process of the patch submission is described in
> Documentation/SubmittingPatches (yes, it is a bit involved, and it is
> slightly easier when you use http://submitgit.herokuapp.com/, but please
> note that this process has served us well over one decade).
>
> Please also note that top-posting is highly discouraged on this list:
>
> A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
>>Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
>>>A: Top-posting.
>>>>Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?
>
> Now to your patch:
>
>> diff --git a/sequencer.c b/sequencer.c
>> index cdfac82..ce06876 100644
>> --- a/sequencer.c
>> +++ b/sequencer.c
>> @@ -176,7 +176,8 @@ static void print_advice(int show_hint, struct
>> replay_opts *opts)
>>                 else
>>                         advise(_("after resolving the conflicts, mark
>> the corrected paths\n"
>>                                  "with 'git add <paths>' or 'git rm <paths>'\n"
>> -                                "and commit the result with 'git commit'"));
>> +                                "then continue the %s with 'git %s
>> --continue'\n"
>> +                                "or cancel the %s operation with 'git
>> %s --abort'" ),  action_name(opts), action_name(opts),
>> action_name(opts), action_name(opts));
>
> That is an awful lot of repetition right there, with an added
> inconsistency that the action is referred to by its name alone in the
> "--continue" case, but with "operation" added in the "--abort" case.
>
> And additionally, in the most common case (one commit to cherry-pick), the
> advice now suggests a more complicated operation than necessary: a simply
> `git commit` would be enough, then.
>
> Can't we have a test whether this is the last of the commits to be
> cherry-picked, and if so, have the simpler advice again?
>
> Ciao,
> Johannes

Ok, knowing that I'm not on the last element of the sequencer is beyond my git code knowledge. I see that in do_pick_commit() , we do not have a copy of the todo_list. I would assume that would be necessary, but I'm not certain. I could file_exists(git_path_seq_dir()). This works to determine if one or many commits are being cherry-picked / reverted, although it will return true even on the last of n cherry-picks. I think that is still reasonable.

I was trying to just take the same text as 'git status' already displays. It could indeed be made more concise.

Happy to use the submission process, I just didn't know it. Thanks for letting me know.

(Yup, sorry about the top-posting. I just wan't careful.)
Stephen
Johannes Schindelin· Aug 1, 2016, 09:12 UTC · re: Stephen Morton · lore

Re: git cherry-pick conflict error message is deceptive when cherry-picking multiple commits

Hi Stephen,
On Wed, 27 Jul 2016, Stephen Morton wrote:
Show 35 quoted lines
> On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 11:03 AM, Johannes Schindelin
> <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 27 Jul 2016, Stephen Morton wrote:
> >
> >> diff --git a/sequencer.c b/sequencer.c
> >> index cdfac82..ce06876 100644
> >> --- a/sequencer.c
> >> +++ b/sequencer.c
> >> @@ -176,7 +176,8 @@ static void print_advice(int show_hint, struct
> >> replay_opts *opts)
> >>                 else
> >>                         advise(_("after resolving the conflicts, mark
> >> the corrected paths\n"
> >>                                  "with 'git add <paths>' or 'git rm <paths>'\n"
> >> -                                "and commit the result with 'git commit'"));
> >> +                                "then continue the %s with 'git %s
> >> --continue'\n"
> >> +                                "or cancel the %s operation with 'git
> >> %s --abort'" ),  action_name(opts), action_name(opts),
> >> action_name(opts), action_name(opts));
> >
> > That is an awful lot of repetition right there, with an added
> > inconsistency that the action is referred to by its name alone in the
> > "--continue" case, but with "operation" added in the "--abort" case.
> >
> > And additionally, in the most common case (one commit to cherry-pick), the
> > advice now suggests a more complicated operation than necessary: a simply
> > `git commit` would be enough, then.
> >
> > Can't we have a test whether this is the last of the commits to be
> > cherry-picked, and if so, have the simpler advice again?
> 
> Ok, knowing that I'm not on the last element of the sequencer is
> beyond my git code knowledge.

Oh, my mistake: I meant to say that this information could be easily provided by `pick_commits()` if it passed it to `print_advice()` via `do_pick_commit()`.

Ciao, Johannes

Stephen Morton· Aug 10, 2016, 19:14 UTC · re: Johannes Schindelin · lore

Re: git cherry-pick conflict error message is deceptive when cherry-picking multiple commits

On Mon, Aug 1, 2016 at 5:12 AM, Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> wrote:

Show 46 quoted lines
> Hi Stephen,
>
> On Wed, 27 Jul 2016, Stephen Morton wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 11:03 AM, Johannes Schindelin
>> <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> wrote:
>> >
>> > On Wed, 27 Jul 2016, Stephen Morton wrote:
>> >
>> >> diff --git a/sequencer.c b/sequencer.c
>> >> index cdfac82..ce06876 100644
>> >> --- a/sequencer.c
>> >> +++ b/sequencer.c
>> >> @@ -176,7 +176,8 @@ static void print_advice(int show_hint, struct
>> >> replay_opts *opts)
>> >>                 else
>> >>                         advise(_("after resolving the conflicts, mark
>> >> the corrected paths\n"
>> >>                                  "with 'git add <paths>' or 'git rm <paths>'\n"
>> >> -                                "and commit the result with 'git commit'"));
>> >> +                                "then continue the %s with 'git %s
>> >> --continue'\n"
>> >> +                                "or cancel the %s operation with 'git
>> >> %s --abort'" ),  action_name(opts), action_name(opts),
>> >> action_name(opts), action_name(opts));
>> >
>> > That is an awful lot of repetition right there, with an added
>> > inconsistency that the action is referred to by its name alone in the
>> > "--continue" case, but with "operation" added in the "--abort" case.
>> >
>> > And additionally, in the most common case (one commit to cherry-pick), the
>> > advice now suggests a more complicated operation than necessary: a simply
>> > `git commit` would be enough, then.
>> >
>> > Can't we have a test whether this is the last of the commits to be
>> > cherry-picked, and if so, have the simpler advice again?
>>
>> Ok, knowing that I'm not on the last element of the sequencer is
>> beyond my git code knowledge.
>
> Oh, my mistake: I meant to say that this information could be easily
> provided by `pick_commits()` if it passed it to `print_advice()` via
> `do_pick_commit()`.
>
> Ciao,
> Johannes

(Finally getting back to this.) Something like this, then Johannes? (I intentionally print the '--continue' hint even in the case where it's last of n commits that fails.)

~/ws/extern/git (maint *%>) > git diff
diff --git a/sequencer.c b/sequencer.c
index 617a3df..e0071aa 100644
--- a/sequencer.c
+++ b/sequencer.c
@@ -154,7 +154,7 @@ static void free_message(struct commit *commit,
struct commit_message *msg)
        unuse_commit_buffer(commit, msg->message);
 }

-static void print_advice(int show_hint, struct replay_opts *opts)
+static void print_advice(int show_hint, int multiple_commits, struct
replay_opts *opts)
 {
        char *msg = getenv("GIT_CHERRY_PICK_HELP");

@@ -174,14 +174,14 @@ static void print_advice(int show_hint, struct
replay_opts *opts)
                        advise(_("after resolving the conflicts, mark
the corrected paths\n"
                                 "with 'git add <paths>' or 'git rm <paths>'"));
                else
-                        if  (! file_exists(git_path_seq_dir()))
-                                advise(_("after resolving the
conflicts, mark the corrected paths\n"
-                                        "with 'git add <paths>' or
'git rm <paths>'\n"
-                                                 "and commit the
result with 'git commit'"));
-                        else
+                        if  (multiple_commits)
                                advise(_("after resolving the
conflicts, mark the corrected paths with 'git add <paths>' or 'git rm
<paths>'\n"
                                         "then continue with 'git %s
--continue'\n"
                                         "or cancel with 'git %s
--abort'" ), action_name(opts), action_name(opts));
+                        else
+                                advise(_("after resolving the
conflicts, mark the corrected paths\n"
+                                        "with 'git add <paths>' or
'git rm <paths>'\n"
+                                        "and commit the result with
'git commit'"));
        }
 }

@@ -445,7 +445,7 @@ static int allow_empty(struct replay_opts *opts,
struct commit *commit)
                return 1;
 }

-static int do_pick_commit(struct commit *commit, struct replay_opts *opts)
+static int do_pick_commit(struct commit *commit, struct replay_opts
*opts, int multiple_commits)
 {
        unsigned char head[20];
        struct commit *base, *next, *parent;
@@ -600,7 +600,7 @@ static int do_pick_commit(struct commit *commit,
struct replay_opts *opts)
                      : _("could not apply %s... %s"),
                      find_unique_abbrev(commit->object.oid.hash,
DEFAULT_ABBREV),
                      msg.subject);
-               print_advice(res == 1, opts);
+               print_advice(res == 1, multiple_commits, opts);
                rerere(opts->allow_rerere_auto);
                goto leave;
        }
@@ -964,6 +964,7 @@ static int pick_commits(struct commit_list
*todo_list, struct replay_opts *opts)
 {
        struct commit_list *cur;
        int res;
+    int multiple_commits = (todo_list->next) != NULL;

        setenv(GIT_REFLOG_ACTION, action_name(opts), 0);
        if (opts->allow_ff)
@@ -973,7 +974,7 @@ static int pick_commits(struct commit_list
*todo_list, struct replay_opts *opts)

        for (cur = todo_list; cur; cur = cur->next) {
                save_todo(cur, opts);
-               res = do_pick_commit(cur->item, opts);
+               res = do_pick_commit(cur->item, opts, multiple_commits);
                if (res)
                        return res;
        }
@@ -1021,7 +1022,7 @@ static int sequencer_continue(struct replay_opts *opts)
 static int single_pick(struct commit *cmit, struct replay_opts *opts)
 {
        setenv(GIT_REFLOG_ACTION, action_name(opts), 0);
-       return do_pick_commit(cmit, opts);
+       return do_pick_commit(cmit, opts, 0);
 }

 int sequencer_pick_revisions(struct replay_opts *opts)
~/ws/extern/git (maint *%>) > git diff @{u}
diff --git a/sequencer.c b/sequencer.c
index c6362d6..e0071aa 100644
--- a/sequencer.c
+++ b/sequencer.c
@@ -154,7 +154,7 @@ static void free_message(struct commit *commit,
struct commit_message *msg)
        unuse_commit_buffer(commit, msg->message);
 }

-static void print_advice(int show_hint, struct replay_opts *opts)
+static void print_advice(int show_hint, int multiple_commits, struct
replay_opts *opts)
 {
        char *msg = getenv("GIT_CHERRY_PICK_HELP");

@@ -174,9 +174,14 @@ static void print_advice(int show_hint, struct
replay_opts *opts)
                        advise(_("after resolving the conflicts, mark
the corrected paths\n"
                                 "with 'git add <paths>' or 'git rm <paths>'"));
                else
-                       advise(_("after resolving the conflicts, mark
the corrected paths\n"
-                                "with 'git add <paths>' or 'git rm <paths>'\n"
-                                "and commit the result with 'git commit'"));
+                        if  (multiple_commits)
+                               advise(_("after resolving the
conflicts, mark the corrected paths with 'git add <paths>' or 'git rm
<paths>'\n"
+                                        "then continue with 'git %s
--continue'\n"
+                                        "or cancel with 'git %s
--abort'" ), action_name(opts), action_name(opts));
+                        else
+                                advise(_("after resolving the
conflicts, mark the corrected paths\n"
+                                        "with 'git add <paths>' or
'git rm <paths>'\n"
+                                        "and commit the result with
'git commit'"));
        }
 }

@@ -440,7 +445,7 @@ static int allow_empty(struct replay_opts *opts,
struct commit *commit)
                return 1;
 }

-static int do_pick_commit(struct commit *commit, struct replay_opts *opts)
+static int do_pick_commit(struct commit *commit, struct replay_opts
*opts, int multiple_commits)
 {
        unsigned char head[20];
        struct commit *base, *next, *parent;
@@ -595,7 +600,7 @@ static int do_pick_commit(struct commit *commit,
struct replay_opts *opts)
                      : _("could not apply %s... %s"),
                      find_unique_abbrev(commit->object.oid.hash,
DEFAULT_ABBREV),
                      msg.subject);
-               print_advice(res == 1, opts);
+               print_advice(res == 1, multiple_commits, opts);
                rerere(opts->allow_rerere_auto);
                goto leave;
        }
@@ -959,6 +964,7 @@ static int pick_commits(struct commit_list
*todo_list, struct replay_opts *opts)
 {
        struct commit_list *cur;
        int res;
+    int multiple_commits = (todo_list->next) != NULL;

        setenv(GIT_REFLOG_ACTION, action_name(opts), 0);
        if (opts->allow_ff)
@@ -968,7 +974,7 @@ static int pick_commits(struct commit_list
*todo_list, struct replay_opts *opts)

        for (cur = todo_list; cur; cur = cur->next) {
                save_todo(cur, opts);
-               res = do_pick_commit(cur->item, opts);
+               res = do_pick_commit(cur->item, opts, multiple_commits);
                if (res)
                        return res;
        }
@@ -1016,7 +1022,7 @@ static int sequencer_continue(struct replay_opts *opts)
 static int single_pick(struct commit *cmit, struct replay_opts *opts)
 {
        setenv(GIT_REFLOG_ACTION, action_name(opts), 0);
-       return do_pick_commit(cmit, opts);
+       return do_pick_commit(cmit, opts, 0);
 }

 int sequencer_pick_revisions(struct replay_opts *opts)


------

Stephen

← back to recent threads