Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclouds@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> In the spirit of status' in-progress info. I think showing this is
> more useful than "(no branch)". I tend to do "git br" more often than
> "git st" and this catches my eyes.
Very nice idea. This would also have been a nice way to avoid
confusion when my officemate used bisect for the first time.
Any particular reason the above explanation is after the triple-dash
instead of before it?
[...]
> --- a/builtin/branch.c
> +++ b/builtin/branch.c
> @@ -557,7 +557,15 @@ static void show_detached(struct ref_list *ref_list)
>
> if (head_commit && is_descendant_of(head_commit, ref_list->with_commit)) {
> struct ref_item item;
> - item.name = xstrdup(_("(no branch)"));
> + struct stat st;
> + if ((!stat(git_path("rebase-apply"), &st) &&
> + stat(git_path("rebase-apply/applying"), &st)) ||
> + !stat(git_path("rebase-merge"), &st))
Here's a straight translation of contrib/completion/prompt.sh for
comparison, skipping the cases that don't involve automatically
detaching HEAD:
if (!stat(git_path("rebase-merge"), &st) && S_ISDIR(st.st_mode))
item.name = xstrdup(_("(rebasing)"));
else if (!access(git_path("rebase-apply/rebasing"), F_OK))
item.name = xstrdup(_("(rebasing)"));
else if (!access(git_path("BISECT_LOG"), F_OK))
item.name = xstrdup(_("(bisecting)"));
else
item.name = xstrdup(_("(no branch)"));
That would mean:
* using access() instead of stat() to avoid unnecessary work
* relying on rebase--am to write .git/rebase-apply/rebasing when
appropriate instead of guessing
Not important, though. :)
Jonathan
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html