From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
To: git@vger.kernel.org
Cc: mirth hickford <mirth.hickford@gmail.com>
Subject: [PATCH] checkout: do not bother "tracking" report on detached HEAD
Date: Sat, 30 Mar 2024 14:37:14 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <xmqqa5mfl7ud.fsf@gitster.g> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKcCxfAVGr2QoaXiT81gVZ0mfq3zJs7TywRhJzevwKX7wChJ4w@mail.gmail.com> (mirth hickford's message of "Sat, 30 Mar 2024 07:49:58 +0000")
By definition, a detached HEAD state is tentative and there is no
configured "upstream" that it always wants to integrate with. But
if you detach from a branch that is behind its upstream, e.g.,
$ git checkout -t -b main origin/main
$ git checkout main
$ git reset --hard HEAD^
$ git checkout --detach main
you'd see "you are behind your upstream origin/main". This does not
happen when you replace the last step in the above with any of these
$ git checkout HEAD^0
$ git checkout --detach HEAD
$ git checkout --detach origin/main
Before 32669671 (checkout: introduce --detach synonym for "git
checkout foo^{commit}", 2011-02-08) introduced the "--detach"
option, the rule to decide if we show the tracking information
used to be:
If --quiet is not given, and if the given branch name is a real
local branch (i.e. the one we can compute the file path under
.git/, like 'refs/heads/master' or "HEAD" which stand for the
name of the current branch", then give the tracking information.
to exclude things like "git checkout master^0" (which was the
official way to detach HEAD at the commit before that commit) and
"git checkout origin/master^0" from showing tracking information,
but still do show the tracking information for the current branch
for "git checkout HEAD". The introduction of an explicit option
"--detach" broke this subtley. The new rule should have been
If --quiet is given, do not bother with tracking info.
If --detach is given, do not bother with tracking info.
Otherwise, if we know that the branch name given is a real local
branch, or if we were given "HEAD" and "HEAD" is not detached,
then attempt to show the tracking info.
but it allowed "git checkout --detach master" to also show the
tracking info by mistake. Let's tighten the rule to fix this.
Reported-by: mirth hickford <mirth.hickford@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
---
mirth hickford <mirth.hickford@gmail.com> writes:
>> git switch --detach main
> HEAD is now at 5a07c3bde Refactor...
> Your branch is behind 'origin/main' by 1 commit, and can be fast-forwarded.
> (use "git pull" to update your local branch)
>
>> git pull
> You are not currently on a branch.
I think the instruction meant to say "use 'git pull' with
appropriate options to update" but had to ellide the details due
to limited screen real estate. And it is quite expected that a
"git pull" from a detached HEAD would not do anything.
Because my local branches do not track any upstream branches, I
have little experience with the message in question. Given
that, I doubt that I am the best person to comment on this
issue, but having said that, I observe that this is shared
between "checkout" and "switch".
Having said that, I think that the instruction is what is wrong.
What is wrong is the fact that the command assumed that you want
to keep up with the upstream of the branch you detached from.
builtin/checkout.c | 3 ++-
t/t2020-checkout-detach.sh | 5 ++++-
2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/builtin/checkout.c b/builtin/checkout.c
index 2e8b0d18f4..26e1a64569 100644
--- a/builtin/checkout.c
+++ b/builtin/checkout.c
@@ -1030,7 +1030,8 @@ static void update_refs_for_switch(const struct checkout_opts *opts,
remove_branch_state(the_repository, !opts->quiet);
strbuf_release(&msg);
if (!opts->quiet &&
- (new_branch_info->path || (!opts->force_detach && !strcmp(new_branch_info->name, "HEAD"))))
+ !opts->force_detach &&
+ (new_branch_info->path || !strcmp(new_branch_info->name, "HEAD")))
report_tracking(new_branch_info);
}
diff --git a/t/t2020-checkout-detach.sh b/t/t2020-checkout-detach.sh
index bce284c297..8d90d02850 100755
--- a/t/t2020-checkout-detach.sh
+++ b/t/t2020-checkout-detach.sh
@@ -176,7 +176,10 @@ test_expect_success 'tracking count is accurate after orphan check' '
git config branch.child.merge refs/heads/main &&
git checkout child^ &&
git checkout child >stdout &&
- test_cmp expect stdout
+ test_cmp expect stdout &&
+
+ git checkout --detach child >stdout &&
+ test_grep ! "can be fast-forwarded\." stdout
'
test_expect_success 'no advice given for explicit detached head state' '
--
2.44.0-413-gd6fd04375f
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-03-30 21:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-03-30 7:49 Bug: `git switch --detach` gives inapplicable advice mirth hickford
2024-03-30 21:37 ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2024-04-05 7:00 ` [PATCH] checkout: do not bother "tracking" report on detached HEAD M Hickford
2024-04-05 17:07 ` Junio C Hamano
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=xmqqa5mfl7ud.fsf@gitster.g \
--to=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mirth.hickford@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
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).