On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 12:18:30PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Emily Shaffer <emilyshaffer@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > In cases when a submodule fetch fails when there are many submodules, the error > > from the lone failing submodule fetch is buried under activity on the other > > submodules if more than one fetch fell back on fetch-by-oid. Call out a failure > > late so the user is aware that something went wrong. > > > > Example without this change: > > > $ git pull --rebase > > remote: Counting objects: 1591, done > > remote: Finding sources: 100% (4317/4317) > > remote: Total 4317 (delta 1923), reused 4252 (delta 1923) > > Receiving objects: 100% (4317/4317), 2.09 MiB | 8.15 MiB/s, done. > > Resolving deltas: 100% (1923/1923), completed with 101 local objects. > > From https://android.googlesource.com/platform/superproject > > [snip ~100 lines] > > From https://android.googlesource.com/platform/prebuilts/fullsdk/platforms/android-29 > > * branch a97149980b7d8acf48392af591b35689f7205d9e -> FETCH_HEAD > > From https://android.googlesource.com/platform/prebuilts/fullsdk-darwin/platform-tools > > * branch 98f9454af8ca210818eff4f502097c471d7327b5 -> FETCH_HEAD > > From https://android.googlesource.com/platform/prebuilts/checkstyle > > * branch 6fb3e23f05ed186908ea9f48d6692220891363b0 -> FETCH_HEAD > > * branch f21d92f6339f0993a946b25fa2172c2ceb5e332b -> FETCH_HEAD > > From https://android.googlesource.com/platform/prebuilts/androidx/studio > > * branch bed5e7b5866b8698bbcd1879134b03ac312a2ba8 -> FETCH_HEAD > > From https://android.googlesource.com/platform/prebuilts/androidx/internal > > * branch 179375220f834de5dfbee169f4c2f948d850a203 -> FETCH_HEAD > > * branch 1dcf3ceef9a86001c693fa34b3513f0c4af26178 -> FETCH_HEAD > > * branch 2ea3ccef4c98f5de1b74affd1dda33f5b2834a45 -> FETCH_HEAD > > * branch a09de09c3814c3d31cc770d5351b92d29ea624ae -> FETCH_HEAD > > * branch d2ae6add8b2c0e28899e4faeb2d6889ceefb0b62 -> FETCH_HEAD > > * branch e244e2a5f7d98f47f75d06ef57ef1c6c5701a38d -> FETCH_HEAD > > Auto packing the repository in background for optimum performance. > > See "git help gc" for manual housekeeping. > > From https://android.googlesource.com/platform/prebuilts/androidx/external > > * branch c3df2fa7f3e63b8714ac8d24f86a26cc50ee4af5 -> FETCH_HEAD > > fatal: remote error: want c5bd7796550b3742772c8fb8c73a1311013b5159 not valid > > From https://android.googlesource.com/platform/external/noto-fonts > > * branch 02969d3046f6944a5a211d2331d1c82736487f01 -> FETCH_HEAD > > * branch 9ee45fcd0b8bb8621c1cdbc6de5fe7502eff7393 -> FETCH_HEAD > > From https://android.googlesource.com/platform/external/dokka > > * branch 03a8ed966a7b847931a0ee20327f989837aaff13 -> FETCH_HEAD > > * branch cb1684602b5b4e18385d890c972764c55d177704 -> FETCH_HEAD > > * branch fd4521e89ab0e01447dda9b42be2b9bbc000f02f -> FETCH_HEAD > > From https://android.googlesource.com/platform/external/doclava > > * branch 04ddf3962f0cd40c81a2e144f27f497223782457 -> FETCH_HEAD > > * branch 44bf22680e939b21a21a365f6038d5883d5163c8 -> FETCH_HEAD > > * branch 66f673f4a3865f3b4ab645655a6484101dbd051f -> FETCH_HEAD > > > > Signed-off-by: Emily Shaffer <emilyshaffer@xxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > As hinted by the snippet in the commit-message (should I remove it? I > > think it's a poignant example, I couldn't see the fatal without grepping > > even after being told it was there) this manifested to an end user via > > 'git pull'. > > It indeed is too noisy, especially without showing what happens with > this patch. Sure, it makes sense. I'll take it out in next round. > > Is it clear to the users that a block of lines starting "From $URL" > and ending before the next "From $AnotherURL" is about the same > repository, including error messages? Well, for me - and the bug reporter - the "fatal" line visually blends in with the "From" next to it. I think once you see the "fatal" line it's clear where it's coming from, sure. I wonder if the line order still holds with -j specified, though. > > > diff --git a/builtin/fetch.c b/builtin/fetch.c > > index b4c6d921d0..0c19781cb9 100644 > > --- a/builtin/fetch.c > > +++ b/builtin/fetch.c > > @@ -1857,6 +1857,8 @@ int cmd_fetch(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix) > > verbosity < 0, > > max_children); > > argv_array_clear(&options); > > + if (result) > > + fprintf(stderr, _("Failure during submodule fetch.\n")); > > How does a user find out which submodule had trouble with after > seeing this message? Or is it something you still need to find by > scrolling back? The handiest way is probably the latter; maybe there is some way to achieve the former, but my submodule fu isn't strong enough for me to answer from the top of my head. > > If the latter, I am not sure if there is much point to add a > half-way solution like this. It is a different story if "fetch" > exits with success status when this happens, but I do not think the > "result" that is non-zero is being lost before the function returns, > so... I agree, although I do find it irritating that there's no final success/failure log line from 'git fetch'. I personally don't run 'echo $?' after every step in my Git workflow. It's less trivial (a low bar) to try and point out the submodule(s) which had an issue by this point, but I can give it a shot if you are open to the change. > > > } > > > > string_list_clear(&list, 0);
