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 | 58 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
bisect.c | 11 ++++++---
git-bisect.sh | 26 +++++++++++++-------
t/t6030-bisect-porcelain.sh | 38 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
4 files changed, 119 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/git-bisect.txt b/Documentation/git-bisect.txt
index e97f2de..abaf462 100644
--- a/Documentation/git-bisect.txt
+++ b/Documentation/git-bisect.txt
@@ -17,8 +17,8 @@ The command takes various subcommands, and different options depending
on the subcommand:
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
@@ -36,6 +36,13 @@ whether the selected commit is "good" or "bad". It continues narrowing
down the range until it finds the exact commit that introduced the
change.
+In fact, `git bisect` can be used to find the commit that changed
+*any* property of your project; e.g., the commit that fixed a bug, or
+the commit that caused a benchmark's performance to improve. To
+support this more general usage, the terms "old" and "new" can be used
+in place of "good" and "bad". See
+section "Alternate terms" below for more information.
+
Basic bisect commands: start, bad, good
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
@@ -111,6 +118,45 @@ bad revision, while `git bisect reset HEAD` will leave you on the
current bisection commit and avoid switching commits at all.
+Alternate terms
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+
+Sometimes you are not looking for the commit that introduced a
+breakage, but rather for a commit that caused a change between some
+other "old" state and "new" state. For example, you might be looking
+for the commit that introduced a particular fix. Or you might be
+looking for the first commit in which the source-code filenames were
+finally all converted to your company's naming standard. Or whatever.
+
+In such cases it can be very confusing to use the terms "good" and
+"bad" to refer to "the state before the change" and "the state after
+the change". So instead, you can use the terms "old" and "new",
+respectively, in place of "good" and "bad". (But note that you cannot
+mix "good" and "bad" with "old" and "new" in a single session.)
+
+In this more general usage, you provide `git bisect` with a "new"
+commit has some property and an "old" commit that doesn't have that
+property. Each time `git bisect` checks out a commit, you test if that
+commit has the property. If it does, mark the commit as "new";
+otherwise, mark it as "old". When the bisection is done, `git bisect`
+will report which commit introduced the property.
+
+To use "old" and "new" instead of "good" and bad, you must run `git
+bisect start` without commits as argument and then run the following
+commands to add the commits:
+
+------------------------------------------------
+git bisect old [<rev>]
+------------------------------------------------
+
+to indicate that a commit was before the sought change, or
+
+------------------------------------------------
+git bisect new [<rev>...]
+------------------------------------------------
+
+to indicate that it was after.
+
Bisect visualize
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
@@ -387,6 +433,14 @@ 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
+------------
+
Getting help
~~~~~~~~~~~~
diff --git a/bisect.c b/bisect.c
index 857cf59..f7292cb 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(term_bad, "new") && !strcmp(term_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 0b3c820..42e1cee 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
@@ -294,7 +296,7 @@ bisect_next_check() {
false
;;
t,,"$TERM_GOOD")
- # have bad but not good. we could bisect although
+ # have bad (or new) but not good (or old). we could bisect although
# this is less optimum.
eval_gettextln "Warning: bisecting only with a \$TERM_BAD commit." >&2
if test -t 0
@@ -587,14 +589,20 @@ check_and_set_terms () {
write_terms bad good
fi
;;
+ new|old)
+ if ! test -s "$GIT_DIR/BISECT_TERMS"
+ then
+ write_terms new old
+ fi
+ ;;
esac ;;
esac
}
bisect_voc () {
case "$1" in
- bad) echo "bad" ;;
- good) echo "good" ;;
+ bad) echo "bad|new" ;;
+ good) echo "good|old" ;;
esac
}
@@ -610,7 +618,7 @@ case "$#" in
git bisect -h ;;
start)
bisect_start "$@" ;;
- bad|good|"$TERM_BAD"|"$TERM_GOOD")
+ bad|good|new|old|"$TERM_BAD"|"$TERM_GOOD")
bisect_state "$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
--
2.5.0.rc0.10.gd2bff5d
--
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