Re: [PATCH] name-rev: test showing failure with non-monotonic commit dates
From: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <hidden>
Date: 2022-02-15 07:20:11
On Mon, Feb 14 2022, Jacob Keller wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
From: Jacob Keller <redacted> If a commit in a sequence of linear history has a non-monotonically increasing commit timestamp, git name-rev will not properly name the commit. However, if you use --annotate-stdin then the commit does actually get picked up and named properly. Analyzing the source, it appears to be caused by the cutoff logic which is some sort of heuristic which relies on monotonically increasing commit dates. This seems like the cutoff using commit date is some sort of heuristic which reduces the cost of describing something.. but --annotate-stdin and --all don't use it. In the example setup I could do: echo "<commit id>" | git name-rev --annotate-stdin and get the expected result without the cutoff logic, and it seems at least on small repositories to be as fast as the normal attempt, except it produces accurate results. Signed-off-by: Jacob Keller <redacted> --- t/t6120-describe.sh | 62 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 62 insertions(+)diff --git a/t/t6120-describe.sh b/t/t6120-describe.sh index 9781b92aeddf..e9f897e42591 100755 --- a/t/t6120-describe.sh +++ b/t/t6120-describe.sh@@ -488,6 +488,68 @@ test_expect_success 'name-rev covers all conditions while looking at parents' ' ) ' +# A-B-C-D-E-main +# +# Where C has a non-monotonically increasing commit timestamp w.r.t. other +# commits +test_expect_success 'non-monotonic commit dates setup' ' + git init non-monotonic && + ( + cd non-monotonic && + + echo A >file && + git add file && + GIT_COMMITTER_DATE="2020-01-01 18:00" git commit -m A && + + echo B >file && + git add file && + GIT_COMMITTER_DATE="2020-01-02 18:00" git commit -m B && + + echo C >file && + git add file && + GIT_COMMITTER_DATE="2005-01-01 18:00" git commit -m C && + + echo D >file && + git add file && + GIT_COMMITTER_DATE="2020-01-04 18:00" git commit -m D && + + echo E >file && + git add file && + GIT_COMMITTER_DATE="2020-01-05 18:00" git commit -m E + )
Shorter & avoids the needless subshell as:
git init repo &&
test_commit -C repo --date="2020-01-01 18:00" A &&
test_commit -C repo --date="2020-01-02 18:00" B &&
[...]
+test_expect_failure 'name-rev commit timestamp prevents naming commits' ' + ( + cd non-monotonic && + + B=$(git rev-parse main~3) && + + echo "$B main~3" >expect && + git name-rev $B >actual && + + test_cmp expect actual + ) +'
I haven't checked, but is the explicit peeling to $B really needed here,
are the results different with a main~3 or main~3^{commit}?
I.e. the first column of the output will of course be, but will the
result on the second column? I suspect not, but haven't run this. In any
case I tihnk teh test/commit message could do with an explanation.
+test_expect_success 'name-rev --all works with non-monotonic' ' + ( + cd non-monotonic && + + cat >expect <<EOF &&
You can use "<<-\EOF" here so you can indent these:
+main +main~1 +main~2 +main~3 +main~4 +EOF + + git log --pretty=%H | git name-rev --annotate-stdin --name-only >actual &&
Don't use "git" on the LHS of a pipe, in case it segfaults, so:
git log [...] >revs &&
git name-rev [...] <revs >actual
+ + test_cmp expect actual + ) +' + # B # o # \