Nathan Goldbaum <ngoldbau@ucsc.edu> [Wed, 27 Jan 2016 16:16:38 -0600] rev 27950
bookmarks: improve documentation for --rev option
Siddharth Agarwal <sid0@fb.com> [Wed, 27 Jan 2016 12:33:07 -0800] rev 27949
merge: undocument checkunknown and checkignored configs for 3.7
We've discovered an issue with this flag during certain kinds of rebases. When:
(1) we're rebasing while currently on the destination commit, and
(2) an untracked or ignored file F is currently in the working copy, and
(3) the same file F is in a source commit, and
(4) F has different contents in the source commit,
then we'll try to merge the file rather than overwrite it.
An earlier patch I sent honored the options for these situations as well.
Unfortunately, rebases go through the same flow as the old, deprecated 'hg
merge --force'. We'd rather not make any changes to 'hg merge --force'
behavior, and there's no way from this point in the code to figure out whether
we're in 'hg rebase' or 'hg merge --force'.
Pierre-Yves David and I came up with the idea to split the 'force' flag up into
'force' for rebases, and 'forcemerge' for merge. Since this is a very
disruptive change and we're in freeze mode, simply undocument the options for
this release so that our hands aren't tied by BC concerns. We'll redocument
them in the next release.
FUJIWARA Katsunori <foozy@lares.dti.ne.jp> [Thu, 28 Jan 2016 20:10:06 +0900] rev 27948
commands: advance current active bookmark at pull --update correctly
Before this patch, "hg pull --update" doesn't advance current active
bookmark correctly, if pulling itself doesn't advance it, even though
"hg pull" + "hg update" does so.
Existing test for "pull --update works the same as pull && update" in
test-bookmarks.t doesn't examine this case, because pulling itself
advance current active bookmark before actual updating the working
directory in that test case.
To advance current active bookmark at "hg pull --update" correctly,
this patch examines 'movemarkfrom' instead of 'not checkout'.
Even if 'not checkout' at the invocation of postincoming(), 'checkout'
is overwritten by "the revision to update to" value returned by
destutil.destupdate() in such case. Therefore, 'not checkout'
condition means "update destination is revision #0", and isn't
suitable for examining whether active bookmark should be advanced.
Even though examination around "movemarkfrom == repo['.'].node()" may
seem a little redundant just for this issue, this makes it easier to
compare (and unify in the future, maybe) with the same logic to update
bookmark at "hg update" below.
if not ret and movemarkfrom:
if movemarkfrom == repo['.'].node():
pass # no-op update
elif bookmarks.update(repo, [movemarkfrom], repo['.'].node()):
ui.status(_("updating bookmark %s\n") % repo._activebookmark)
else:
# this can happen with a non-linear update
ui.status(_("(leaving bookmark %s)\n") %
repo._activebookmark)
bookmarks.deactivate(repo)
Matt Harbison <matt_harbison@yahoo.com> [Sun, 24 Jan 2016 00:10:19 -0500] rev 27947
largefiles: prevent committing a missing largefile
Previously, if the largefile was deleted at the time of a commit, the standin
was silently not updated and its current state (possibly garbage) was recorded.
The test makes it look like this is somewhat of an edge case, but the same thing
happens when an `hg revert` followed by `rm` changes the standin.
Aside from the second invocation of this in lfutil.updatestandinsbymatch()
(which is what triggers this test case), the three other uses are guarded by
dirstate checks for added or modified, or an existence check in the filesystem.
So aborting in lfutil.updatestandins() should be safe, and will avoid silent
skips in the future if this is used elsewhere.
Augie Fackler <augie@google.com> [Wed, 27 Jan 2016 10:24:25 -0500] rev 27946
changegroup: fix treemanifest exchange code (issue5061)
There were two mistakes: one was accidental reuse of the fclnode
variable from the loop gathering file nodes, and the other (masked by
that bug) was not correctly handling deleted directories. Both cases
are now fixed and the test passes.
Matt Mackall <mpm@selenic.com> [Fri, 22 Jan 2016 12:08:20 -0600] rev 27945
log: speed up single file log with hidden revs (issue4747)
On repos with lots of heads, the filelog() code could spend several
minutes decompressing manifests. This change instead tries to
efficiently scan the changelog for candidates and decompress as few
manifests as possible. This is a regression introduced in 3.3 by the
linkrev adjustment code. Prior to that, filelog was nearly instant.
For the repo in the bug report, this improves time of a simple log
command from ~3 minutes to ~.5 seconds, a 360x speedup.
For the main Mercurial repo, a log of commands.py slows down from
1.14s to 1.45s, a 27% slowdown. This is still faster than the file()
revset, which takes 2.1 seconds.