I want to get list of files and directories affected by specific commit. I have no problem getting the commit itself but I rather don't know how to get affected files and directories.
Just to make it clear I need something like this:
file x - deleted
file y - added
file z - modified
Git is snapshot-based; each commit includes a full list of files and their state. Any notion of "affected" files needs another commit to compare it to. This is commonly done against its parents, which seems to be what you're asking about. You can figure out which files are different between two commits (or more exactly, their trees) by using the git_diff family of functions.
You can find an example of doing so in the examples listing for libgit2. There is also a more general annotated diff example. The second link also shows how to list individual files as well as their contents, if you need that. Check the reference for a a full listing of available function to work with diffs.
Note that this won't give you affected directorires by itself, as Git does not track directories, but only files.
You're looking for git diff.
The same function exists in libgit2, and the documentation for it is here.
If you're analyzing older commits, "git diff [commit1] [commitAfterCommit1]" will give you a list of changes that the second commit made from the first. You could prune this output to get yourself just the changed file names.
Related
I am working with a tool which auto-generates a large amount of C code. The tool generates code for a batch of .c and .h files at each run. For some reason, the tool isn't smart enough to recognize when the files have no substantial changes, so in many cases it simply updates a timestamp in the comments at the top of each file. Otherwise, the file remains unaltered.
When I run git status in that scenario, I sometimes see dozens or hundreds of files changed. But as I review the changes to the individual files, most of them have no real changes - just an update to the timestamp. I have to go through each file one-by-one to determine if there are any actual changes to be committed.
Is there a way to configure Git so that it can ignore inconsequential changes such as the timestamp in the header comments? Or how might I otherwise deal with this situation?
Thanks for your help.
Is there a way to configure Git so that it can ignore inconsequential changes such as the timestamp in the header comments? Or how might I otherwise deal with this situation?
Yes; this is the purpose of a filter.
You might be familiar with git's notion of "clean" and "smudge" filters already, that's how it handles line ending conversion. When you are on a Windows computer and have Windows-style line endings in your working directory, you might set a .gitattribute like * text=auto indicating that you want files checked into the repository with "normalized" Unix-style line endings. In this case, the files will have the "clean" filter applied to convert \r\n line endings to \n style line endings. Similarly, the files will be "smudged" on checkout to convert from \n to \r\n on-disk.
You can create your own clean and smudge filters to remove (or add) data when translating between the working directory and the repository. For these files you can add an attribute:
*.c filter=autogen
And then you can configure your autogen filter, with commands to run in the "clean" (into the repository) and "smudge" (into the working directory) directions.
git config --global filter.autogen.clean remove_metadata
git config --global filter.autogen.smudge cat
(Using cat is a "noop" as far as filters are concerned).
The Pro Git book has more detailed examples of creating your own filters.
I discovered a way to address the problem of trivial changes using Beyond Compare. I will describe the process as it pertains to ignoring timestamp updates in auto-generated C files, but it can be easily adapted to other situations and languages:
Configure Beyond Compare as the Git difftool. See here for specific details about how to do this.
(Optional but helpful) Add a Git alias for the git difftool --dir-diff --no-symlinks command (for example, dtd).
Make some changes (e.g. auto-generate your files), and run git dtd to do a directory diff. Beyond Compare will open and show you a before/after Folder Comparison of your changes.
Open a Text Compare session window for one of your changed files. Open the Tools menu and select File Formats.
Open the Grammar tab, delete the "Comments" grammar element.
Add a new grammar element and give it a meaningful name such as "Generation Time Comment".
For Category, select the "Delimited" grammar element. In the "Text from" box, enter the text you would like to ignore. For example, if the timestamp in your auto-generated code starts with the string * Generation Time:, enter it into the "Text from" box. Check the "Stop at end of line" checkbox.
Click the "Save" button and go back to your Text Compare session window.
Open the Session menu and select Session Settings. Open the Importance tab.
Look for your new grammar element (e.g. "Generation Time Comment") and uncheck it. This will tell Beyond Compare to treat it as an unimportant change.
Open the Comparison tab, select Rule-Based Comparison.
Change the dropdown at the bottom of the dialog to Update session defaults.
Close Beyond Compare, and then reopen it again by running the git dtd command.
All of the files in the Folder Compare session which contain nothing but an update to the timestamp will be shown with unimportant differences. If you want to completely hide files with unimportant differences, toggle off Ignore Unimportant Differences in the View menu.
Reference: https://www.scootersoftware.com/support.php?zz=kb_unimportantv3
I have checked in the same file (filename) twice in 2 different branches (say, development and release).
This breaks just about anything, so I want to take 1 version and "properly" copy/merge it to the other branch, later merging in the lost changes manually (from a backup). Then I would lose history for 1 file but at least the 2 files would be connected again.
How to do it?
Also note, since the connection is broken, I cannot mere, also, when doing a Version Tree, both files have different version trees. (It is not 2 views at different files in 1 Version Tree, like is the normal/correct case.)
Also, I assume the problem is with the folder having some kind of a reference to 2 different files, but somehow, I cannot edit the folder?!
Those are call "evil twins" (also described in that SO question)
(one less thing to worry with Git ;) )
The easiest way is to pick one branch:
remove the file from the other branch (rmname),
and to the merge.
The merge will add that same file in the other branch.
That process (rmname + merge) is illustrated in "Clearcase: How do I merge in a specific file from one view, into another, to avoid the Evil Twin scenario?"
(edit by Andreas)
Your solution worked great, I changed it for me since I noticed I have a specific case:
The file got bad since someone else renamed it... so it was not just as simple as your solution, but I had to do it "by hand", as is
Go to X:\FullyQualifiedPath (correct path in VOB)
Use:
cleartool ln FullyQualifiedName ./FileName
where FullyQualifiedName is the name as you get it e. g. from VersionTree when you say “Send To -> Copy” (something like //view, drop the file: before). This creates the link
Afterwards, you can see the desired version in the ClearCase Explorer again.
In Clearcase, I want to copy (fork, split) a file while preserving its history. Something like svn cp old.txt new.txt. How do I do it?
It isn't possible do fork a file in ClearCase.
If you refactor your code and split a file in two, one of them will appear as a new file and you will loose the information about who coded it. The annotate command will say the author of the lines are who splited it.
UCM or not, you cannot duplicate easily the full history of a file.
The best way to isolate an history is still to create a branch in order to make new versions to that file without impacting the same file in the original branch.
Thinking 'svn cp' should be available in ClearCase might come from the fact that, in SVN, branches are directories, and a tool like cc2svn will actually replicate ClearCase branches using 'svn cp'.
But since, with ClearCase, branches are first-class citizen, it is best to reason in term of branch than in term of copy/fork.
From the main page of cc2svn:
There is a difference in creating the branches in ClearCase and SVN:
SVN copies all files from parent branch to the target like: svn cp branches/main branches/dev_branch
ClearCase creates the actual branch for file upon checkout operation only.
Pretty simply done
Check out parent folder
Move element you wish to duplicate to appropriate location (not within the checked out parent folder)
Undo Checkout of parent folder
All the files get returned to the original folder with history and also the duplicate ones remain in the new location with the history too. Now each file can be checked out and changed individually
There are some files we want ignored, not tracked, by git, and we are having trouble figuring out how to do that.
We have some third-party C library which is unpacked and we have it in Git. But when you configure && make it, it produces many new files. How to write .gitignore to track source files and not the new stuff. (it's not like forbidding *.o)
Edit: There are at least 12 file-types. So we would like NOT to enumerate, which type we want and which not.
Use ! to include all the types of files you need. Something like in the following example"
*
!*.c
!*.h
Explicitly specifying which files should be tracked and ignoring all others might be a solution. * says ignore everything and subsequent lines specify files and directories which should not be ignored. Wildcards are allowed.
*
!filename
!*.extension
!directory/
!/file_in_root_directory
!/directory_in_root_directory
Remember that the order matters. Putting * at the end makes all previous lines ineffective.
Take a look at man gitignore(5) and search for !. It says
Patterns have the following format:
(...)
An optional prefix ! which negates the pattern; any matching file excluded by a previous pattern will become included again. If a negated pattern matches, this will override lower precedence patterns sources.
I'm not sure why you say "it's not like forbidding *.o", but I think you mean that there aren't any good patterns you can identify that apply to the generated files but not to the source files? If it's just a few things that appear (like individual built executables that often don't have any extension on Linux), you can name them explicitly in .gitignore, so they aren't a problem.
If there really are lots and lots of files that get generated by the build process that share extensions and other patterns with the source files, then just use patterns that do include your source files. You can even put * in .gitignore if it's really that bad. This will mean that no new files show up when you type git status, or get added when you use git add ., but it doesn't harm any files that are already added to the repository; git will still tell you about changes to them fine, and pick them up when you use git add .. It just puts a bit more burden on you to explicitly start tracking files that you do care about.
I would make sure the repo is clean (no changes, no untracked files), run configure && make and then put the newly untracked filed into the ignore file. Something like git status --porcelain | fgrep '??' | cut -c4- will pull them out automatically, but it would be worth some eyeball time to make sure that is correct...
I have a big named branch with a lot of changes. Some of these changes are non-destructive so I want to pick these specific files out first, and merge them with default as soon as possible. (Then later, the destructive changes are merged as well.)
In Git I would create another branch and squash all changesets outside of the index, then I would add the specific files to the index and commit. After that, I could merge this temporary branch with master so master has a clean commit with only the non-destructive change. I don't know how to do this with Mercurial.
You can use hg cat to grab the contents of a file as it exists on any particular branch, and replace the working copy version with that.
This isn't technically a merge, but since you're replacing whole files you shouldn't have too much of a bad time merging things later:
for example, to grab myfile.c form branch somefeature, and replace the working copy version, do:
hg cat path/to/myfile.c -r somefeature > path/to/myfile.c
note that this completely replaces the working copy file so make sure you have no outstanding changes first
I think mercurialqueues is what you want. With mq you can turn any changeset into a patch and any patch into a changeset. So taking a changeset converting it to a patch deleting the chunks out of the patch that you don't want and then applying it to whatever branch you want. This is a fairly complex operation though and requires a certain amount of discipline on your part. So I would try to nail down your workflow on a test repo before trying it on code you care about.
As far as I know, Mercurial doesnt any have tools to split changesets. If youre lucky, all the changes you want are in separate changesets and then you can use the TransplantExtension. I think it can be compared to Git's cherry-pick but I havent used git much.
You can also use hg diff to manually commit the changes to a certain file to a new branch. Use the rev range to mark your entire source branch:
hg diff myfile -r startrevision:endrevision
The output can be treated as a patch. Do this for each file you want and commit them and then merge. Skipping the destructive changes. You can also, of course, do this multiple times of a destructive change is in the middle of a revision range.
Having said that what youre trying to do isnt something mercurial was built for. That hardcore history editing is more Git's area (note that its just my opinion). Keep your stable changes and destructive changes in separate changesets (and maybe even in separate branches). I use transplant, rebase and strip to move changes around. When its all done, they are merged and properly pushed.
Oh, and check MercurialQueues. I havent used it myself but Ive seen it do some crazy stuff. Maybe its capable of doing something along the lines of what you want.