On Sun, Oct 9, 2016 at 2:51 PM, Dennis Kaarsemaker
<dennis@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Sat, 2016-10-08 at 19:30 -0500, Michael Tutty wrote:
>> Hey all,
>> I'm working on some server-side software to do a merge. By using git
>> worktree it's possible to check out a given branch for a bare repo and
>> merge another branch into it. It's very fast, even with large
>> repositories.
>>
>> The only exception seems to be merging to master. When I do git
>> worktree add /tmp/path/to/worktree master I get an error:
>>
>> [fatal: 'master' is already checked out at '/path/to/bare/repo']
>>
>> But this is clearly not true, git worktree list gives:
>>
>> [/path/to/bare/repo (bare)]
>>
>> ...and of course, there is no work tree at that path, just the bare
>> repo files you'd expect.
>
> The worktree code treats the base repo as a worktree, even if it's
> bare. For the purpose of being able to do a checkout of the main branch
> of a bare repo, this patch should do:
>
> diff --git a/t/t2025-worktree-add.sh b/t/t2025-worktree-add.sh
> index 4bcc335..b618d6b 100755
> --- a/t/t2025-worktree-add.sh
> +++ b/t/t2025-worktree-add.sh
> @@ -138,6 +138,14 @@ test_expect_success 'checkout from a bare repo without "add"' '
> )
> '
>
> +test_expect_success '"add" default branch of a bare repo' '
> + (
> + git clone --bare . bare2 &&
> + cd bare2 &&
> + git worktree add ../there3 master
> + )
> +'
> +
> test_expect_success 'checkout with grafts' '
> test_when_finished rm .git/info/grafts &&
> test_commit abc &&
> diff --git a/worktree.c b/worktree.c
> index 5acfe4c..35e95b7 100644
> --- a/worktree.c
> +++ b/worktree.c
> @@ -345,6 +345,8 @@ const struct worktree *find_shared_symref(const char *symref,
>
> for (i = 0; worktrees[i]; i++) {
> struct worktree *wt = worktrees[i];
> + if(wt->is_bare)
> + continue;
>
> if (wt->is_detached && !strcmp(symref, "HEAD")) {
> if (is_worktree_being_rebased(wt, target)) {
>
>
You're fast :) I'm still studying 8d9fdd7 (worktree.c: check whether
branch is rebased in another worktree - 2016-04-22). But yeah that
should fix it.
> But I'm wondering why the worktree code does this. A bare repo isn't a
> worktree and I think it shouldn't treat it as one. A patch that rips
> out this feature and updates the tests to match would look like this:
>
>
> diff --git a/builtin/worktree.c b/builtin/worktree.c
> index 5c4854d..3600530 100644
> --- a/builtin/worktree.c
> +++ b/builtin/worktree.c
> @@ -382,15 +382,11 @@ static int add(int ac, const char **av, const char *prefix)
> static void show_worktree_porcelain(struct worktree *wt)
> {
> printf("worktree %s\n", wt->path);
> - if (wt->is_bare)
> - printf("bare\n");
> - else {
> - printf("HEAD %s\n", sha1_to_hex(wt->head_sha1));
> - if (wt->is_detached)
> - printf("detached\n");
> - else
> - printf("branch %s\n", wt->head_ref);
> - }
> + printf("HEAD %s\n", sha1_to_hex(wt->head_sha1));
> + if (wt->is_detached)
> + printf("detached\n");
> + else
> + printf("branch %s\n", wt->head_ref);
> printf("\n");
> }
This goes back to the first very first commit of "git worktree list":
bb9c03b (worktree: add 'list' command - 2015-10-08) and was sort of
pointed out during review [1] but nobody answered it.
A bare repo does not have an associated worktree. However only main
worktree can be bare. If we take this out, "git worktree list"'s first
line will no longer be about the main worktree (because it does not
exist). That may cause trouble since we promised in "git-worktree.txt"
that the main worktree is listed first. I don't think we have any way
else to determine if the main worktree exists. Showing "bare" may be
the way to see if we have a main worktree or not. So we probably want
to keep this function unchanged.
[1] https://public-inbox.org/git/%3CCANoM8SWeqxD2vWLQmEfxxxn8Dz4yPfjGOoOH=Azn1A3So+wz2Q@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx%3E/
--
Duy