On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 12:41 AM, Eric Sunshine <sunshine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> diff --git a/worktree.c b/worktree.c
>> @@ -217,3 +217,41 @@ char *find_shared_symref(const char *symref, const char *target)
>> +int update_worktrees_head_symref(const char *oldref, const char *newref)
>> +{
>> + int error = 0;
>> + struct strbuf path = STRBUF_INIT;
>> + struct strbuf origref = STRBUF_INIT;
>> + int i;
>> + struct worktree **worktrees = get_worktrees();
>> +
>> + for (i = 0; worktrees[i]; i++) {
>> + if (worktrees[i]->is_detached)
>> + continue;
>> +
>> + strbuf_reset(&path);
>> + strbuf_reset(&origref);
>> + strbuf_addf(&path, "%s/HEAD", worktrees[i]->git_dir);
>> +
>> + if (parse_ref(path.buf, &origref, NULL))
>> + continue;
>> +
>> + if (!strcmp(origref.buf, oldref)) {
>> + int prefix_len = strlen(absolute_path(get_git_common_dir())) + 1;
>> + const char *symref = path.buf + prefix_len;
>> +
>> + /* no need to pass logmsg here as HEAD didn't really move */
>> + if (create_symref(symref, newref, NULL)) {
>> + error = -1;
>> + break;
>
> Is aborting upon the first error desired behavior? (Genuine question.)
> Would it make more sense to continue attempting the rename for the
> remaining worktrees (and remember that an error was encountered)?
Since all these HEADs stay at the same (or close) location, if one
fails, I think the rest will fail too. Which leads to a series of
warnings if we continue anyway. A more interesting approach is update
HEADs in a transaction, so we successfully update all or we update
none. But I do not know if ref transactions can be used for HEAD,
especially worktree HEADs. I'm ok with either abort here or continue
anyway, though.
--
Duy
--
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