Commit 9f50d32 introduced a fix for FreeBSD /bin/sh misbehaviour
when dot-sourcing a file containing "return" statements outside of
any function, from a function in another shell script. That issue
affects FreeBSD 9.x, and is not present in the /bin/sh in FreeBSD
10.3 and later. Update the comment to clarify this.

The example from 9f50d32's commit message produces the expected output
on FreeBSD 10.3 and -CURRENT (the upcoming 11.0):

% sh script1.sh
only this line should show
%

Signed-off-by: Ed Maste <emaste@freebsd.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>

Since e481af06 (rebase: Handle cases where format-patch fails) we
notice if format-patch fails and return immediately from
git-rebase--am. We save the return value with ret=$?, but then we
return $?, which is usually zero in this case.

Fix this by returning $ret instead.

Cc: Andrew Wong <andrew.kw.w@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Clemens Buchacher <clemens.buchacher@intel.com>
Helped-by: Jorge Nunes <jorge.nunes@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>

When the `--fork-point` argument was added to `git rebase`, we changed
the value of $upstream to be the fork point instead of the point from
which we want to rebase.  When $orig_head..$upstream is empty this does
not change the behaviour, but when there are new changes in the upstream
we are no longer checking if any of them are patch-identical with
changes in $upstream..$orig_head.

Fix this by introducing a new variable to hold the fork point and using
this to restrict the range as an extra (negative) revision argument so
that the set of desired revisions becomes (in fork-point mode):

	git rev-list --cherry-pick --right-only \
		$upstream...$orig_head ^$fork_point

This allows us to correctly handle the scenario where we have the
following topology:

	    C --- D --- E  <- dev
	   /
	  B  <- master@{1}
	 /
	o --- B' --- C* --- D*  <- master

where:
- B' is a fixed-up version of B that is not patch-identical with B;
- C* and D* are patch-identical to C and D respectively and conflict
  textually if applied in the wrong order;
- E depends textually on D.

The correct result of `git rebase master dev` is that B is identified as
the fork-point of dev and master, so that C, D, E are the commits that
need to be replayed onto master; but C and D are patch-identical with C*
and D* and so can be dropped, so that the end result is:

	o --- B' --- C* --- D* --- E  <- dev

If the fork-point is not identified, then picking B onto a branch
containing B' results in a conflict and if the patch-identical commits
are not correctly identified then picking C onto a branch containing D
(or equivalently D*) results in a conflict.

This change allows us to handle both of these cases, where previously we
either identified the fork-point (with `--fork-point`) but not the
patch-identical commits *or* (with `--no-fork-point`) identified the
patch-identical commits but not the fact that master had been rewritten.

Reported-by: Ted Felix <ted@tedfelix.com>
Signed-off-by: John Keeping <john@keeping.me.uk>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>

When using `git format-patch --ignore-if-in-upstream` we are only
allowed to give a single revision range.  In the next commit we will
want to add an additional exclusion revision in order to handle fork
points correctly, so convert `git-rebase--am` to use a symmetric
difference with `--cherry-pick --right-only`.

This does not change the result of the format-patch invocation, just how
we spell the arguments.

Signed-off-by: John Keeping <john@keeping.me.uk>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>

Work around /bin/sh that does not like "return" at the top-level
of a file that is dot-sourced from inside a function definition.

* km/avoid-non-function-return-in-rebase:
  Revert "rebase: fix run_specific_rebase's use of "return" on FreeBSD"
  rebase: avoid non-function use of "return" on FreeBSD

Since a1549e10, 15d4bf2e and 01a1e646 (first appearing in v1.8.4)
the git-rebase--*.sh scripts have used a "return" to stop execution
of the dot-sourced file and return to the "dot" command that
dot-sourced it.  The /bin/sh utility on FreeBSD however behaves
poorly under some circumstances when such a "return" is executed.

In particular, if the "dot" command is contained within a function,
then when a "return" is executed by the script it runs (that is not
itself inside a function), control will return from the function
that contains the "dot" command skipping any statements that might
follow the dot command inside that function.  Commit 99855ddf (first
appearing in v1.8.4.1) addresses this by making the "dot" command
the last line in the function.

Unfortunately the FreeBSD /bin/sh may also execute some statements
in the script run by the "dot" command that appear after the
troublesome "return".  The fix in 99855ddf does not address this
problem.

For example, if you have script1.sh with these contents:

run_script2() {
        . "$(dirname -- "$0")/script2.sh"
        _e=$?
        echo only this line should show
        [ $_e -eq 5 ] || echo expected status 5 got $_e
        return 3
}
run_script2
e=$?
[ $e -eq 3 ] || { echo expected status 3 got $e; exit 1; }

And script2.sh with these contents:

if [ 5 -gt 3 ]; then
        return 5
fi
case bad in *)
        echo always shows
esac
echo should not get here
! :

When running script1.sh (e.g. '/bin/sh script1.sh' or './script1.sh'
after making it executable), the expected output from a POSIX shell
is simply the single line:

only this line should show

However, when run using FreeBSD's /bin/sh, the following output
appears instead:

should not get here
expected status 3 got 1

Not only did the lines following the "dot" command in the run_script2
function in script1.sh get skipped, but additional lines in script2.sh
following the "return" got executed -- but not all of them (e.g. the
"echo always shows" line did not run).

These issues can be avoided by not using a top-level "return" in
script2.sh.  If script2.sh is changed to this:

main() {
        if [ 5 -gt 3 ]; then
                return 5
        fi
        case bad in *)
                echo always shows
        esac
        echo should not get here
        ! :
}
main

Then it behaves the same when using FreeBSD's /bin/sh as when using
other more POSIX compliant /bin/sh implementations.

We fix the git-rebase--*.sh scripts in a similar fashion by moving
the top-level code that contains "return" statements into its own
function and then calling that as the last line in the script.

Signed-off-by: Kyle J. McKay <mackyle@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Matthieu Moy <Matthieu.Moy@imag.fr>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>

Signed-off-by: Nicolas Vigier <boklm@mars-attacks.org>
Signed-off-by: brian m. carlson <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>

In a shell snippet meant to be sourced by other shell scripts, an
opening #! line does more harm than good.

The harm:

 - When the shell library is sourced, the interpreter and options from
   the #! line are not used.  Specifying a particular shell can
   confuse the reader into thinking it is safe for the shell library
   to rely on idiosyncrasies of that shell.

 - Using #! instead of a plain comment drops a helpful visual clue
   that this is a shell library and not a self-contained script.

 - Tools such as lintian can use a #! line to tell when an
   installation script has failed by forgetting to set a script
   executable.  This check does not work if shell libraries also start
   with a #! line.

The good:

 - Text editors notice the #! line and use it for syntax highlighting
   if you try to edit the installed scripts (without ".sh" suffix) in
   place.

The use of the #! for file type detection is not needed because Git's
shell libraries are meant to be edited in source form (with ".sh"
suffix).  Replace the opening #! lines with comments.

This involves tweaking the test harness's valgrind support to find
shell libraries by looking for "# " in the first line instead of "#!"
(see v1.7.6-rc3~7, 2011-06-17).

Suggested by Russ Allbery through lintian.  Thanks to Jeff King and
Clemens Buchacher for further analysis.

Tested by searching for non-executable scripts with #! line:

	find . -name .git -prune -o -type f -not -executable |
	while read file
	do
		read line <"$file"
		case $line in
		'#!'*)
			echo "$file"
			;;
		esac
	done

The only remaining scripts found are templates for shell scripts
(unimplemented.sh, wrap-for-bin.sh) and sample input used in tests
(t/t4034/perl/{pre,post}).

Signed-off-by: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>

We only need to do these two tasks

    git gc --auto
    rm -fr "$dotest"

ourselves if the script was invoked as a standalone program; when
invoked with --rebasing (from git-rebase--am.sh), cascade control back
to the ultimate caller git-rebase.sh to do this for us.

Signed-off-by: Ramkumar Ramachandra <artagnon@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>

If the user has a cover-letter configuration set to anything other
than 'false', 'git format-patch' may generate a cover letter, which
has no place in "format-patch | am" pipeline.

The internal invocation of format-patch must explicitly override the
configuration from the command line, just like --src-prefix and other
options already do.

Signed-off-by: Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>