* [GSoC] My Git Dev Blog – Week 8 @ 2021-07-11 11:18 Atharva Raykar 2021-07-13 8:18 ` Kaartic Sivaraam 0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: Atharva Raykar @ 2021-07-11 11:18 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Git List; +Cc: Christian Couder, Shourya Shukla, Kaartic Sivaraam Here's my weekly update: https://atharvaraykar.me/gitnotes/week8 I am currently blocked by trying to pass a super-prefix parameter to another command, when calling it from within C. If you are interested in helping with that, this will take you to right to it: https://atharvaraykar.me/gitnotes/week8#path-pains Have a nice day. --- Atharva Raykar ಅಥರ್ವ ರಾಯ್ಕರ್ अथर्व रायकर ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [GSoC] My Git Dev Blog – Week 8 2021-07-11 11:18 [GSoC] My Git Dev Blog – Week 8 Atharva Raykar @ 2021-07-13 8:18 ` Kaartic Sivaraam 2021-07-13 8:46 ` Atharva Raykar 0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: Kaartic Sivaraam @ 2021-07-13 8:18 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Atharva Raykar; +Cc: Git List, Christian Couder, Shourya Shukla Hi Atharva, On 11/07/21 4:48 pm, Atharva Raykar wrote: > Here's my weekly update: > https://atharvaraykar.me/gitnotes/week8 > > I am currently blocked by trying to pass a super-prefix parameter > to another command, when calling it from within C. > From the blog: > When queried by the get_super_prefix() function, the answer is (null). > This boggles my mind to no end (see update). The implementation is basically > the same getenv() call? Good to see that you were able to identify the reason yourself. > I am not sure how to tell Git that the environment variable has in fact > been modified, and that it needs to be reinitialized. Maybe I am going > about this whole thing wrong? I get the same feeling too. I took a brief look at how the issue could be fixed and it seems to me that you exploring to set super-prefix might not lead us to the solution. Alternatively, you could explore how other sub-commands handle recursing into submodules. To me it looks like they handle it by spawning a sub-process is likely the easiest approach for achieving recursion. That would solve the super-prefix problem as you have observed. Unfortunately, there's not yet proper support for handling recursion of submodules which calls for working with the data of multiple Git repositories in the same Git process. There was an effort[1] few years ago to make working with other Git repositories simpler without having to spawn a sub-process. The state of the effort is unclear to me. As far as I know, it has been stalled. I hope others could provide more details about it. So, you could try the approach of spawning of sub-process for now. In case there's a better approach than spawning sub-process others might be able to point during review. In the meanwhile, I'll try to take a better look later and see if I could find anything. [1]: https://public-inbox.org/git/20180205235508.216277-1-sbeller@google.com/ -- Sivaraam ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [GSoC] My Git Dev Blog – Week 8 2021-07-13 8:18 ` Kaartic Sivaraam @ 2021-07-13 8:46 ` Atharva Raykar 2021-07-18 9:26 ` Christian Couder 2021-07-18 17:39 ` Kaartic Sivaraam 0 siblings, 2 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: Atharva Raykar @ 2021-07-13 8:46 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Kaartic Sivaraam; +Cc: Git List, Christian Couder, Shourya Shukla On 13-Jul-2021, at 13:48, Kaartic Sivaraam <kaartic.sivaraam@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Atharva, > > On 11/07/21 4:48 pm, Atharva Raykar wrote: >> Here's my weekly update: >> https://atharvaraykar.me/gitnotes/week8 >> I am currently blocked by trying to pass a super-prefix parameter >> to another command, when calling it from within C. >> > > From the blog: > >> When queried by the get_super_prefix() function, the answer is (null). >> This boggles my mind to no end (see update). The implementation is basically >> the same getenv() call? > > Good to see that you were able to identify the reason yourself. > >> I am not sure how to tell Git that the environment variable has in fact >> been modified, and that it needs to be reinitialized. Maybe I am going >> about this whole thing wrong? > > I get the same feeling too. I took a brief look at how the issue could be > fixed and it seems to me that you exploring to set super-prefix might not > lead us to the solution. Alternatively, you could explore how other sub-commands > handle recursing into submodules. To me it looks like they handle it by spawning > a sub-process is likely the easiest approach for achieving recursion. That would > solve the super-prefix problem as you have observed. Yes, I was hoping I would not have to spawn a subprocess for recursing on update, and it does look theoretically possible--it would require changing a lot of of existing code to use functions taking a repository objects rather than assuming 'the_repository'. But since that was outside the scope of my project, I did it like the other implementations that spawned a new process for the recursion of 'update'. > Unfortunately, there's not yet proper support for handling recursion of submodules > which calls for working with the data of multiple Git repositories in the same > Git process. There was an effort[1] few years ago to make working with > other Git repositories simpler without having to spawn a sub-process. The state > of the effort is unclear to me. As far as I know, it has been stalled. I hope > others could provide more details about it. > > So, you could try the approach of spawning of sub-process for now. In case there's > a better approach than spawning sub-process others might be able to point during > review. In the meanwhile, I'll try to take a better look later and see if I could > find anything. I was seeing if it was possible to at least save another spawn for calling init when '--init' is provided for an update. The current implementation does not spawn a separate process for this, so I was hoping I don't add more overhead in the conversion, but it's looking hard to avoid at the moment. > [1]: https://public-inbox.org/git/20180205235508.216277-1-sbeller@google.com/ > > -- > Sivaraam ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [GSoC] My Git Dev Blog – Week 8 2021-07-13 8:46 ` Atharva Raykar @ 2021-07-18 9:26 ` Christian Couder 2021-07-18 17:39 ` Kaartic Sivaraam 1 sibling, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: Christian Couder @ 2021-07-18 9:26 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Atharva Raykar; +Cc: Kaartic Sivaraam, Git List, Shourya Shukla On Tue, Jul 13, 2021 at 10:46 AM Atharva Raykar <raykar.ath@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 13-Jul-2021, at 13:48, Kaartic Sivaraam <kaartic.sivaraam@gmail.com> wrote: > > ... Alternatively, you could explore how other sub-commands > > handle recursing into submodules. To me it looks like they handle it by spawning > > a sub-process is likely the easiest approach for achieving recursion. That would > > solve the super-prefix problem as you have observed. > > Yes, I was hoping I would not have to spawn a subprocess for recursing on > update, and it does look theoretically possible--it would require changing > a lot of of existing code to use functions taking a repository objects > rather than assuming 'the_repository'. But since that was outside the scope > of my project, I did it like the other implementations that spawned a new > process for the recursion of 'update'. Yeah, it's definitely outside the scope of your project. So it's ok to spawn a new process. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [GSoC] My Git Dev Blog – Week 8 2021-07-13 8:46 ` Atharva Raykar 2021-07-18 9:26 ` Christian Couder @ 2021-07-18 17:39 ` Kaartic Sivaraam 2021-07-19 7:04 ` Atharva Raykar 1 sibling, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: Kaartic Sivaraam @ 2021-07-18 17:39 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Atharva Raykar; +Cc: Git List, Christian Couder, Shourya Shukla Hi Atharva, On 13/07/21 2:16 pm, Atharva Raykar wrote: > > I was seeing if it was possible to at least save another spawn for calling > init when '--init' is provided for an update. The current implementation > does not spawn a separate process for this, so I was hoping I don't add > more overhead in the conversion, but it's looking hard to avoid at the > moment. > I'm having some difficulties understanding this. I tried to take a look at the existing code[2][3] in 'git-submodule.sh', I could only see that if '--init' is passed to update, it calls the 'cmd_update' shell function which in turn does invoke 'git submodule--helper init'. OTOH, if '--recursive' is passed 'cmd_update' itself is called recursively called after setting the 'prefix' and 'wt_prefix' shell variables. So, I'm not sure how you mean to say that a sub-process was not spawned when '--init' is passed. Could you clarify this a little? >> [1]: https://public-inbox.org/git/20180205235508.216277-1-sbeller@google.com/ >> [2]: https://github.com/git/git/blob/abb21c7263616f01c5e950861a29279ab21cb02f/git-submodule.sh#L530-L533 [3]: https://github.com/git/git/blob/abb21c7263616f01c5e950861a29279ab21cb02f/git-submodule.sh#L651-L673 -- Sivaraam ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [GSoC] My Git Dev Blog – Week 8 2021-07-18 17:39 ` Kaartic Sivaraam @ 2021-07-19 7:04 ` Atharva Raykar 0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: Atharva Raykar @ 2021-07-19 7:04 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Kaartic Sivaraam; +Cc: Git List, Christian Couder, Shourya Shukla On 18-Jul-2021, at 23:09, Kaartic Sivaraam <kaartic.sivaraam@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Atharva, > > On 13/07/21 2:16 pm, Atharva Raykar wrote: >> I was seeing if it was possible to at least save another spawn for calling >> init when '--init' is provided for an update. The current implementation >> does not spawn a separate process for this, so I was hoping I don't add >> more overhead in the conversion, but it's looking hard to avoid at the >> moment. > > I'm having some difficulties understanding this. I tried to take a look > at the existing code[2][3] in 'git-submodule.sh', I could only see that > if '--init' is passed to update, it calls the 'cmd_update' shell function > which in turn does invoke 'git submodule--helper init'. OTOH, if '--recursive' > is passed 'cmd_update' itself is called recursively called after setting > the 'prefix' and 'wt_prefix' shell variables. > > So, I'm not sure how you mean to say that a sub-process was not spawned > when '--init' is passed. Could you clarify this a little? > >>> [1]: https://public-inbox.org/git/20180205235508.216277-1-sbeller@google.com/ >>> > > [2]: https://github.com/git/git/blob/abb21c7263616f01c5e950861a29279ab21cb02f/git-submodule.sh#L530-L533 > > [3]: https://github.com/git/git/blob/abb21c7263616f01c5e950861a29279ab21cb02f/git-submodule.sh#L651-L673 My mistake. When I wrote that paragraph, I had considered the shell call in my head to be "git submodule init" and not "git submodule--helper init". In the former case, there would be an extra subprocess because 'submodule init' will in turn spawn 'submodule--helper init'. So in short, there would have been no difference between the two versions had I gone down that route. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2021-07-19 7:04 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2021-07-11 11:18 [GSoC] My Git Dev Blog – Week 8 Atharva Raykar 2021-07-13 8:18 ` Kaartic Sivaraam 2021-07-13 8:46 ` Atharva Raykar 2021-07-18 9:26 ` Christian Couder 2021-07-18 17:39 ` Kaartic Sivaraam 2021-07-19 7:04 ` Atharva Raykar
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox https://80x24.org/mirrors/git.git This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).