On Mon, Apr 2, 2018 at 1:53 AM, Johannes Sixt <j6t@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Am 02.04.2018 um 02:36 schrieb Robert Dailey:
>>
>> I'm struggling with a bug that I found introduced in git v2.13.2. The
>> bug was not reproducible in v2.13.1. The issue is that using arguments
>> like "@{-1}" to aliases causes those curly braces to be removed, so
>> once the command is executed after alias processing the argument looks
>> like "@-1". This breaks any aliases you have that wrap `git log` and
>> such. I originally opened the bug on the Git for Windows project
>> (since I use Git mostly on Windows):
>>
>> https://github.com/git-for-windows/git/issues/1220
>
> ...
>>
>> Here is the alias being used for a test:
>>
>> [alias]
>> lgtest = !git log --oneline \"$@\"
>>
>> And here is the command I invoke for the test:
>>
>> $ git lgtest @{-1}
>>
>> I should get logs for the previously-checked-out branch.
>>
>> When `prepare_shell_cmd()` is called in run-command.c, it gets expanded
>> like so:
>>
>> + [0] "sh" const char *
>> + [1] "-c" const char *
>> + [2] "git log --oneline \"$@\" \"$@\"" const char *
>> + [3] "git log --oneline \"$@\"" const char *
>> + [4] "@{-1}" const char *
>>
>> With my modifications (again, patch inline below) I get this:
>>
>> + [0] "sh" const char *
>> + [1] "-c" const char *
>> + [2] "git log --oneline \"$@\"" const char *
>> + [3] "@{-1}" const char *
>>
>> The second version looks much better.
>
>
> But this is wrong. Try this on the command line:
>
> sh -c 'echo "$@"' a b c
>
> Notice how this prints only 'b c', not 'a b c'. The reason is that the
> argument 'a' is treated like a "script" name, i.e. what you get for "$0",
> and 'b' and 'c' as the actual arguments to the "script".
>
> That is, you must fill in some dummy "script" name at slot [3], and
> run_command chooses to put the alias text there.
>
>> I think the constant nesting of
>> commands inside each other that the first version does is somehow
>> causing curly braces to be removed. I don't understand enough about
>> shell processing to know why it would do this.
>
>
> Some shells expand the curly braces. They must get lost somewhere by one of
> the two shell invocations that happen on the way.
>
> BTW, you don't happen to have a file named '@-1' in your directory, most
> likely by accident?
Thanks for your help. I checked for @-1 but I do not have a file with
that name (good catch though). I contacted the MinGW mailing list and
they seem to indicate that {-1} is a valid brace expansion. I was able
to verify the git.exe code itself is not causing this problem. It
seems to be GNU bash doing it. But oddly enough, the Ubuntu version of
Bash for example does not process {-1} as a brace expansion. It seems
weird to me that Git uses a syntax for a portion of its revision
specification that could be ambiguously treated as syntax processed by
Bash. In other words, I feel like this would have been designed into
Git years ago, so I'm not sure why this is a problem now all of a
sudden.
Their suggested solution was to start quoting items in the list or
escaping the braces, but that will make git revisions less intuitive
to use and make commands more tedious to type. I am still discussing
things over there but for the purposes of the Git mailing list, I
think it's clear at this point this is not an issue with Git itself.
Having said that, thanks again for the help!!
