2a43e0e550
The within_depth() function is used to check whether pathspecs limited
by a max-depth parameter are acceptable. It takes a path to check, a
maximum depth, and a "base" depth. It counts the components in the
path (by counting slashes), adds them to the base, and compares them to
the maximum.
However, if the base does not have any slashes at all, we always return
`true`. If the base depth is 0, then this is correct; no matter what the
maximum is, we are always within it. However, if the base depth is
greater than 0, then we might return an erroneous result.
This ends up not causing any user-visible bugs in the current code. The
call sites in dir.c always pass a base depth of 0, so are unaffected.
But tree_entry_interesting() uses this function differently: it will
pass the prefix of the current entry, along with a `1` if the entry is a
directory, in essence checking whether items inside the entry would be
of interest. It turns out not to make a difference in behavior, but the
reasoning is complex.
Given a tree like:
file
a/file
a/b/file
walking the tree and calling tree_entry_interesting() will yield the
following results:
(with max_depth=0):
file: yes
a: yes
a/file: no
a/b: no
(with max_depth=1):
file: yes
a: yes
a/file: yes
a/b: no
So we have inconsistent behavior in considering directories interesting.
If they are at the edge of our depth but at the root, we will recurse
into them, but then find all of their entries uninteresting (e.g., in
the first case, we will look at "a" but find "a/*" uninteresting). But
if they are at the edge of our depth and not at the root, then we will
not recurse (in the second example, we do not even bother entering
"a/b").
This turns out not to matter because the only caller which uses
max-depth pathspecs is cmd_grep(), which only cares about blob entries.
From its perspective, it is exactly the same to not recurse into a
subtree, or to recurse and find that it contains no matching entries.
Not recursing is merely an optimization.
It is debatable whether tree_entry_interesting() should consider such an
entry interesting. The only caller does not care if it sees the tree
itself, and can benefit from the optimization. But if we add a
"max-depth" limiter to regular diffs, then a diff with
DIFF_OPT_TREE_IN_RECURSIVE would probably want to show the tree itself,
but not what it contains.
This patch just fixes within_depth(), which means we consider such
entries uninteresting (and makes the current caller happy). If we want
to change that in the future, then this fix is still the correct first
step, as the current behavior is simply inconsistent.
This has the effect the function tree_entry_interesting() now behaves
like following on the first example:
(with max_depth=0):
file: yes
a: no
a/file: no
a/b: no
Meaning we won't step in "a/" no more to realize all "a/*" entries are
uninterested, but we stop at the tree entry itself.
Based-on-patch-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Toon Claes <toon@iotcl.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Git - fast, scalable, distributed revision control system
Git is a fast, scalable, distributed revision control system with an unusually rich command set that provides both high-level operations and full access to internals.
Git is an Open Source project covered by the GNU General Public License version 2 (some parts of it are under different licenses, compatible with the GPLv2). It was originally written by Linus Torvalds with help of a group of hackers around the net.
Please read the file INSTALL for installation instructions.
Many Git online resources are accessible from https://git-scm.com/ including full documentation and Git related tools.
See Documentation/gittutorial.adoc to get started, then see
Documentation/giteveryday.adoc for a useful minimum set of commands, and
Documentation/git-<commandname>.adoc for documentation of each command.
If git has been correctly installed, then the tutorial can also be
read with man gittutorial or git help tutorial, and the
documentation of each command with man git-<commandname> or git help <commandname>.
CVS users may also want to read Documentation/gitcvs-migration.adoc
(man gitcvs-migration or git help cvs-migration if git is
installed).
The user discussion and development of Git take place on the Git mailing list -- everyone is welcome to post bug reports, feature requests, comments and patches to git@vger.kernel.org (read Documentation/SubmittingPatches for instructions on patch submission and Documentation/CodingGuidelines).
Those wishing to help with error message, usage and informational message
string translations (localization l10) should see po/README.md
(a po file is a Portable Object file that holds the translations).
To subscribe to the list, send an email to git+subscribe@vger.kernel.org (see https://subspace.kernel.org/subscribing.html for details). The mailing list archives are available at https://lore.kernel.org/git/, https://marc.info/?l=git and other archival sites.
Issues which are security relevant should be disclosed privately to the Git Security mailing list git-security@googlegroups.com.
The maintainer frequently sends the "What's cooking" reports that list the current status of various development topics to the mailing list. The discussion following them give a good reference for project status, development direction and remaining tasks.
The name "git" was given by Linus Torvalds when he wrote the very first version. He described the tool as "the stupid content tracker" and the name as (depending on your mood):
- random three-letter combination that is pronounceable, and not actually used by any common UNIX command. The fact that it is a mispronunciation of "get" may or may not be relevant.
- stupid. contemptible and despicable. simple. Take your pick from the dictionary of slang.
- "global information tracker": you're in a good mood, and it actually works for you. Angels sing, and a light suddenly fills the room.
- "goddamn idiotic truckload of sh*t": when it breaks