From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.9 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, FROM_EXCESS_BASE64,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id A242B1F453 for ; Thu, 21 Feb 2019 14:50:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727978AbfBUOum (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Feb 2019 09:50:42 -0500 Received: from mail-wr1-f41.google.com ([209.85.221.41]:32787 "EHLO mail-wr1-f41.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725943AbfBUOum (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Feb 2019 09:50:42 -0500 Received: by mail-wr1-f41.google.com with SMTP id i12so30825009wrw.0 for ; Thu, 21 Feb 2019 06:50:41 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:to:cc:subject:references:user-agent:in-reply-to:date :message-id:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=RTv3JrfQYoM2IXLv3k2UsheIRdAkcwFWnO3yGx2F7HU=; b=ouqlyZ0WS0aAEEfRTif6pDMVQbDNmxOZQYAw+Zy1qr2uD6RJtFN+7DaY2mdWHmGsTX tPIksiaszGsA5Mj5sR38RDmZYYrYfGc9Zqwp21J41fReaN/JEvme1Yl595izWFCVB0jb Vk/ZbDscmpSmqyqWehKRGtbPQg9qGARE9u0CAkYxFRT08RxigoFBBg9ltATeluFrlBQ5 HYI6+/taw2kK/b8ByqcQ44DtHborEsuGPP+X0L66OMX5tf58mVDaffMARYvPmDnm98XX txMMaCYz9UHgm32m3TV5BVH8B0dE1DLkKxE/G6emowYv3UXBeWaqESj0dEeQhIZulrjX IDzQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:references:user-agent :in-reply-to:date:message-id:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=RTv3JrfQYoM2IXLv3k2UsheIRdAkcwFWnO3yGx2F7HU=; b=BAiNjv+7YJMlrZ4M8wrUkIRIhzlXmO73zXrUaLVl2H6BTpzQ6YTxpj4aCCyclQMuz3 QVT9CQJxulfAEU7q/mhggRwiIOEue8UCMT5tIRC3QlKRKX0y/XYm/lquCKhaIkU/T9m+ G6DrVUYBEkeB/nH3rKmLEwj2AcwYLbhHPghSRNLV/3dZnAjmcy3KcG3tlf/exlT3CRwm Ku3h+cxpia/oGKwEjnZsBsxYwMb1SFVd2NQc7WY568L0zGMMiHBTH5WjrbrVBh0mWJ0E DiOLgBDQM+jNHp2HB89LW1Ep2jxCnCo4W1p3jn7vObUgyZgyaljj7kGVj9D7JXeqOJKa Y3VQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AHQUAub138deTQXkNsj65roENdQOUbyjOG+MKUf0DJ+Z5Mw95Vegy9oU TN9C6kMgLyPASWhch7tv/24= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AHgI3IZG1U7EraGkhNPnyutB4UX2elfdO6ref0YqCE32sq2vEfDgnioKzdCUu/h/alyWgjwSq4CtIw== X-Received: by 2002:a5d:528e:: with SMTP id c14mr10300971wrv.304.1550760640078; Thu, 21 Feb 2019 06:50:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from evledraar (dhcp-077-251-215-224.chello.nl. [77.251.215.224]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id s3sm28550559wrt.81.2019.02.21.06.50.38 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Thu, 21 Feb 2019 06:50:39 -0800 (PST) From: =?utf-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsA==?= Bjarmason To: Jeff King Cc: Git Mailing List , Johannes Schindelin , Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: BUG: 2.11-era rebase regression when @{upstream} is implicitly used References: <877ee2jyh3.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com> <20190221141042.GA21737@sigill.intra.peff.net> User-agent: Debian GNU/Linux buster/sid; Emacs 26.1; mu4e 1.1.0 In-reply-to: <20190221141042.GA21737@sigill.intra.peff.net> Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2019 15:50:38 +0100 Message-ID: <87bm355h6p.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Feb 21 2019, Jeff King wrote: > On Thu, Feb 14, 2019 at 02:23:04PM +0100, =C3=86var Arnfj=C3=B6r=C3=B0 Bj= armason wrote: > >> This is not a 2.21 release issue, and pre-dates the built-in rebase. >> >> When you clone any repository, e.g. git.git, and add one commit on top >> of the cloned branch, then run "git rebase" you'll get e.g.: >> >> $ git rebase >> First, rewinding head to replay your work on top of it... >> Applying: foo >> >> Before 4f21454b55 ("merge-base: handle --fork-point without reflog", >> 2016-10-12) you'd get: >> >> $ git rebase >> Current branch master is up to date. > > I'm not entirely sure this is a regression, and not the patch bringing > the behavior into line with what would happen when you _do_ have a > reflog. > >> The results are not the same for "git rebase @{u}" or "git rebase $(git >> rev-parse @{u})": > > Those aren't using "--fork-point", so they're going to behave > differently. The default with no arguments is basically "--fork-point > @{u}". Yeah, that's what it *should* do, but it's not equivalent to using --fork-point manually: # my series on top of origin/master $ git rev-parse HEAD 2a67977d3f70fa7fc4bce89db24a1218dc9ab2aa =20=20=20=20 # Junio's origin/master upstream $ git rev-parse @{u} 35ee755a8c43bcb3c2786522d423f006c23d32df =20=20=20=20 # Where my fork point is $ git merge-base --fork-point @{u} 35ee755a8c43bcb3c2786522d423f006c23d32df =20=20=20=20 # OK $ git rebase 35ee755a8c43bcb3c2786522d423f006c23d32df Current branch master is up to date. =20=20=20=20 # OK $ git rebase $(git merge-base --fork-point @{u}) Current branch master is up to date. =20=20=20=20 # ??? $ git rebase First, rewinding head to replay your work on top of it... [...]