From: Antoine Delaite <antoine.delaite@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
When not looking for a regression during a bisect but for a fix or a
change in another given property, it can be confusing to use 'good'
and 'bad'.
This patch introduce `git bisect new` and `git bisect old` as an
alternative to 'bad' and good': the commits which have a certain
property must be marked as `new` and the ones which do not as `old`.
The output will be the first commit after the change in the property.
During a new/old bisect session you cannot use bad/good commands and
vice-versa.
Some commands are still not available for old/new:
* git rev-list --bisect does not treat the revs/bisect/new and
revs/bisect/old-SHA1 files.
Old discussions:
- http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/86063
introduced bisect fix unfixed to find fix.
- http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/182398
discussion around bisect yes/no or old/new.
- http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/199758
last discussion and reviews
New discussions:
- http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/271320
( v2 1/7-4/7 )
- http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/271343
( v2 5/7-7/7 )
Signed-off-by: Antoine Delaite <antoine.delaite@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Louis Stuber <stuberl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Valentin Duperray <Valentin.Duperray@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Franck Jonas <Franck.Jonas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Lucien Kong <Lucien.Kong@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Nguy <Thomas.Nguy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Huynh Khoi Nguyen Nguyen <Huynh-Khoi-Nguyen.Nguyen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Matthieu Moy <Matthieu.Moy@xxxxxxx>
---
Documentation/git-bisect.txt | 48 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
bisect.c | 11 +++++++---
git-bisect.sh | 43 +++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------
t/t6030-bisect-porcelain.sh | 38 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
4 files changed, 120 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/git-bisect.txt b/Documentation/git-bisect.txt
index 4cb52a7..3c3021a 100644
--- a/Documentation/git-bisect.txt
+++ b/Documentation/git-bisect.txt
@@ -18,8 +18,8 @@ on the subcommand:
git bisect help
git bisect start [--no-checkout] [<bad> [<good>...]] [--] [<paths>...]
- git bisect bad [<rev>]
- git bisect good [<rev>...]
+ git bisect (bad|new) [<rev>]
+ git bisect (good|old) [<rev>...]
git bisect skip [(<rev>|<range>)...]
git bisect reset [<commit>]
git bisect visualize
@@ -104,6 +104,35 @@ For example, `git bisect reset HEAD` will leave you on the current
bisection commit and avoid switching commits at all, while `git bisect
reset bisect/bad` will check out the first bad revision.
+
+Alternative terms: bisect new and bisect old
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+
+If you are not at ease with the terms "bad" and "good", perhaps
+because you are looking for the commit that introduced a fix, you can
+alternatively use "new" and "old" instead.
+But note that you cannot mix "bad" and good" with "new" and "old".
+
+------------------------------------------------
+git bisect new [<rev>]
+------------------------------------------------
+
+Marks the commit as new, e.g. "the bug is no longer there", if you are looking
+for a commit that fixed a bug, or "the feature that used to work is now broken
+at this point", if you are looking for a commit that introduced a bug.
+It is the equivalent of "git bisect bad [<rev>]".
+
+------------------------------------------------
+git bisect old [<rev>...]
+------------------------------------------------
+
+Marks the commit as old, as the opposite of 'git bisect new'.
+It is the equivalent of "git bisect good [<rev>...]".
+
+You must run `git bisect start` without commits as argument and run
+`git bisect new <rev>`/`git bisect old <rev>...` after to add the
+commits.
+
Bisect visualize
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
@@ -379,6 +408,21 @@ In this case, when 'git bisect run' finishes, bisect/bad will refer to a commit
has at least one parent whose reachable graph is fully traversable in the sense
required by 'git pack objects'.
+* Look for a fix instead of a regression in the code
++
+------------
+$ git bisect start
+$ git bisect new HEAD # current commit is marked as new
+$ git bisect old HEAD~10 # the tenth commit from now is marked as old
+------------
++
+Let's consider the last commit has a given property, and that we are looking
+for the commit which introduced this property. For each commit the bisection
+guide us to, we will test if the property is present. If it is we will mark
+the commit as new with 'git bisect new', otherwise we will mark it as old.
+At the end of the bisect session, the result will be the first new commit (e.g
+the first one with the property).
+
SEE ALSO
--------
diff --git a/bisect.c b/bisect.c
index c5f96eb..d447b65 100644
--- a/bisect.c
+++ b/bisect.c
@@ -746,6 +746,11 @@ static void handle_bad_merge_base(void)
"This means the bug has been fixed "
"between %s and [%s].\n",
bad_hex, bad_hex, good_hex);
+ } else if (!strcmp(name_bad, "new") && !strcmp(name_good, "old")) {
+ fprintf(stderr, "The merge base %s is new.\n"
+ "The property has changed "
+ "between %s and [%s].\n",
+ bad_hex, bad_hex, good_hex);
} else {
fprintf(stderr, "The merge base %s is %s.\n"
"This means the first '%s' commit is "
@@ -778,11 +783,11 @@ static void handle_skipped_merge_base(const unsigned char *mb)
}
/*
- * "check_merge_bases" checks that merge bases are not "bad".
+ * "check_merge_bases" checks that merge bases are not "bad" (or "new").
*
- * - If one is "bad", it means the user assumed something wrong
+ * - If one is "bad" (or "new"), it means the user assumed something wrong
* and we must exit with a non 0 error code.
- * - If one is "good", that's good, we have nothing to do.
+ * - If one is "good" (or "old"), that's good, we have nothing to do.
* - If one is "skipped", we can't know but we should warn.
* - If we don't know, we should check it out and ask the user to test.
*/
diff --git a/git-bisect.sh b/git-bisect.sh
index 7bb18db..569898b 100755
--- a/git-bisect.sh
+++ b/git-bisect.sh
@@ -1,14 +1,16 @@
#!/bin/sh
-USAGE='[help|start|bad|good|skip|next|reset|visualize|replay|log|run]'
+USAGE='[help|start|bad|good|new|old|skip|next|reset|visualize|replay|log|run]'
LONG_USAGE='git bisect help
print this long help message.
git bisect start [--no-checkout] [<bad> [<good>...]] [--] [<pathspec>...]
reset bisect state and start bisection.
-git bisect bad [<rev>]
- mark <rev> a known-bad revision.
-git bisect good [<rev>...]
- mark <rev>... known-good revisions.
+git bisect (bad|new) [<rev>]
+ mark <rev> a known-bad revision/
+ a revision after change in a given property.
+git bisect (good|old) [<rev>...]
+ mark <rev>... known-good revisions/
+ revisions before change in a given property.
git bisect skip [(<rev>|<range>)...]
mark <rev>... untestable revisions.
git bisect next
@@ -77,9 +79,7 @@ bisect_start() {
orig_args=$(git rev-parse --sq-quote "$@")
bad_seen=0
eval=''
- # revision_seen is true if a git bisect start
- # has revision as arguments
- revision_seen=0
+ must_write_terms=0
if test "z$(git rev-parse --is-bare-repository)" != zfalse
then
mode=--no-checkout
@@ -105,7 +105,12 @@ bisect_start() {
break
}
- revision_seen=1
+ # The user ran "git bisect start <sha1>
+ # <sha1>", hence did not explicitly specify
+ # the terms, but we are already starting to
+ # set references named with the default terms,
+ # and won't be able to change afterwards.
+ must_write_terms=1
case $bad_seen in
0) state=$NAME_BAD ; bad_seen=1 ;;
@@ -178,7 +183,7 @@ bisect_start() {
} &&
git rev-parse --sq-quote "$@" >"$GIT_DIR/BISECT_NAMES" &&
eval "$eval true" &&
- if test $revision_seen -eq 1 && test ! -s "$GIT_DIR/BISECT_TERMS"
+ if test $must_write_terms -eq 1 && test ! -s "$GIT_DIR/BISECT_TERMS"
then
echo "$NAME_BAD" >"$GIT_DIR/BISECT_TERMS" &&
echo "$NAME_GOOD" >>"$GIT_DIR/BISECT_TERMS"
@@ -288,7 +293,7 @@ bisect_next_check() {
false
;;
t,,"$NAME_GOOD")
- # have bad but not good. we could bisect although
+ # have bad (or new) but not good (or old). we could bisect although
# this is less optimum.
eval_gettextln "Warning: bisecting only with a \$NAME_BAD commit." >&2
if test -t 0
@@ -529,7 +534,7 @@ get_terms () {
check_and_set_terms () {
cmd="$1"
case "$cmd" in
- bad|good)
+ bad|good|new|old)
if test -s "$GIT_DIR/BISECT_TERMS" && test "$cmd" != "$NAME_BAD" && test "$cmd" != "$NAME_GOOD"
then
die "$(eval_gettext "Invalid command: you're currently in a \$NAME_BAD/\$NAME_GOOD bisect.")"
@@ -543,14 +548,22 @@ check_and_set_terms () {
fi
NAME_BAD="bad"
NAME_GOOD="good" ;;
+ new|old)
+ if ! test -s "$GIT_DIR/BISECT_TERMS"
+ then
+ echo "new" >"$GIT_DIR/BISECT_TERMS" &&
+ echo "old" >>"$GIT_DIR/BISECT_TERMS"
+ fi
+ NAME_BAD="new"
+ NAME_GOOD="old" ;;
esac ;;
esac
}
bisect_voc () {
case "$1" in
- bad) echo "bad" ;;
- good) echo "good" ;;
+ bad) echo "bad|old" ;;
+ good) echo "good|new" ;;
esac
}
@@ -566,7 +579,7 @@ case "$#" in
git bisect -h ;;
start)
bisect_start "$@" ;;
- bad|good)
+ bad|good|new|old)
bisect_state "$cmd" "$@" ;;
skip)
bisect_skip "$@" ;;
diff --git a/t/t6030-bisect-porcelain.sh b/t/t6030-bisect-porcelain.sh
index 9e2c203..983c503 100755
--- a/t/t6030-bisect-porcelain.sh
+++ b/t/t6030-bisect-porcelain.sh
@@ -759,4 +759,42 @@ test_expect_success '"git bisect bad HEAD" behaves as "git bisect bad"' '
git bisect reset
'
+test_expect_success 'bisect starts with only one new' '
+ git bisect reset &&
+ git bisect start &&
+ git bisect new $HASH4 &&
+ git bisect next
+'
+
+test_expect_success 'bisect does not start with only one old' '
+ git bisect reset &&
+ git bisect start &&
+ git bisect old $HASH1 &&
+ test_must_fail git bisect next
+'
+
+test_expect_success 'bisect start with one new and old' '
+ git bisect reset &&
+ git bisect start &&
+ git bisect old $HASH1 &&
+ git bisect new $HASH4 &&
+ git bisect new &&
+ git bisect new >bisect_result &&
+ grep "$HASH2 is the first new commit" bisect_result &&
+ git bisect log >log_to_replay.txt &&
+ git bisect reset
+'
+
+test_expect_success 'bisect replay with old and new' '
+ git bisect replay log_to_replay.txt >bisect_result &&
+ grep "$HASH2 is the first new commit" bisect_result &&
+ git bisect reset
+'
+
+test_expect_success 'bisect cannot mix old/new and good/bad' '
+ git bisect start &&
+ git bisect bad $HASH4 &&
+ test_must_fail git bisect old $HASH1
+'
+
test_done
--
2.4.4.414.g318df7a.dirty
--
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