basic git

basic git

[Samuel Wales]

i pulled vanilla bugfix and got errors.  i deleted the repo, cloned
org, did git checkout bugfix, pulled, and still got errors.

git clone https://git.savannah.gnu.org/git/emacs/org-mode.git

i am gitophobic.

===
On branch bugfix
Your branch and 'origin/bugfix' have diverged,
and have 424 and 3 different commits each, respectively.
  (use "git pull" to merge the remote branch into yours)

You have unmerged paths.
  (fix conflicts and run "git commit")
  (use "git merge --abort" to abort the merge)

Unmerged paths:
  (use "git add <file>..." to mark resolution)

	both modified:   lisp/org.el

no changes added to commit (use "git add" and/or "git commit -a")
===

the merge conflict is

<<<<<<< HEAD
;; Version: 9.7-pre
=======
;; Version: 9.6.7
>>>>>>> 7da765e459384f68d764589c94fd26472f1c3361

thanks for anything that will get me back to my old habits of just
having a repo and pulling it.

p.s.  i HATE git.

-- 
The Kafka Pandemic

A blog about science, health, human rights, and misopathy:
https://thekafkapandemic.blogspot.com



-- 
The Kafka Pandemic

A blog about science, health, human rights, and misopathy:
https://thekafkapandemic.blogspot.com

Re: basic git

[Samuel Wales]

how can a freshly cloned bugfix be any different from upstream?

On 6/29/23, Samuel Wales <samologist@gmail.com> wrote:
> i pulled vanilla bugfix and got errors.  i deleted the repo, cloned
> org, did git checkout bugfix, pulled, and still got errors.
>
> git clone https://git.savannah.gnu.org/git/emacs/org-mode.git
>
> i am gitophobic.
>
> ===
> On branch bugfix
> Your branch and 'origin/bugfix' have diverged,
> and have 424 and 3 different commits each, respectively.
>   (use "git pull" to merge the remote branch into yours)
>
> You have unmerged paths.
>   (fix conflicts and run "git commit")
>   (use "git merge --abort" to abort the merge)
>
> Unmerged paths:
>   (use "git add <file>..." to mark resolution)
>
> 	both modified:   lisp/org.el
>
> no changes added to commit (use "git add" and/or "git commit -a")
> ===
>
> the merge conflict is
>
> <<<<<<< HEAD
> ;; Version: 9.7-pre
> =======
> ;; Version: 9.6.7
>>>>>>>> 7da765e459384f68d764589c94fd26472f1c3361
>
> thanks for anything that will get me back to my old habits of just
> having a repo and pulling it.
>
> p.s.  i HATE git.
>
> --
> The Kafka Pandemic
>
> A blog about science, health, human rights, and misopathy:
> https://thekafkapandemic.blogspot.com
>
>
>
> --
> The Kafka Pandemic
>
> A blog about science, health, human rights, and misopathy:
> https://thekafkapandemic.blogspot.com
>


-- 
The Kafka Pandemic

A blog about science, health, human rights, and misopathy:
https://thekafkapandemic.blogspot.com

Re: basic git

[Dumitru Sipos]

It behaves quite normally on my side:

$ git clone https://git.savannah.gnu.org/git/emacs/org-mode.git
Cloning into 'org-mode'...
remote: Counting objects: 141138, done.
remote: Compressing objects: 100% (30420/30420), done.
remote: Total 141138 (delta 110608), reused 141085 (delta 110576)
Receiving objects: 100% (141138/141138), 96.60 MiB | 21.35 MiB/s, done.
Resolving deltas: 100% (110608/110608), done.

$ cd org-mode/

$ git branch -a
* main
   remotes/origin/HEAD -> origin/main
   remotes/origin/bugfix
   remotes/origin/emacs-sync
   remotes/origin/main

$ git checkout bugfix
branch 'bugfix' set up to track 'origin/bugfix'.
Switched to a new branch 'bugfix'

$ git branch -a
* bugfix
   main
   remotes/origin/HEAD -> origin/main
   remotes/origin/bugfix
   remotes/origin/emacs-sync
   remotes/origin/main

$ git pull
Already up to date.

$ git pull origin bugfix
 From https://git.savannah.gnu.org/git/emacs/org-mode
  * branch                bugfix     -> FETCH_HEAD
Already up to date.

$ git --version
git version 2.39.0

On 30-Jun-23 08:56, Samuel Wales wrote:
> how can a freshly cloned bugfix be any different from upstream?
>
> On 6/29/23, Samuel Wales <samologist@gmail.com> wrote:
>> i pulled vanilla bugfix and got errors.  i deleted the repo, cloned
>> org, did git checkout bugfix, pulled, and still got errors.
>>
>> git clone https://git.savannah.gnu.org/git/emacs/org-mode.git
>>
>> i am gitophobic.
>>
>> ===
>> On branch bugfix
>> Your branch and 'origin/bugfix' have diverged,
>> and have 424 and 3 different commits each, respectively.
>>    (use "git pull" to merge the remote branch into yours)
>>
>> You have unmerged paths.
>>    (fix conflicts and run "git commit")
>>    (use "git merge --abort" to abort the merge)
>>
>> Unmerged paths:
>>    (use "git add <file>..." to mark resolution)
>>
>> 	both modified:   lisp/org.el
>>
>> no changes added to commit (use "git add" and/or "git commit -a")
>> ===
>>
>> the merge conflict is
>>
>> <<<<<<< HEAD
>> ;; Version: 9.7-pre
>> =======
>> ;; Version: 9.6.7
>>>>>>>>> 7da765e459384f68d764589c94fd26472f1c3361
>> thanks for anything that will get me back to my old habits of just
>> having a repo and pulling it.
>>
>> p.s.  i HATE git.
>>
>> --
>> The Kafka Pandemic
>>
>> A blog about science, health, human rights, and misopathy:
>> https://thekafkapandemic.blogspot.com
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> The Kafka Pandemic
>>
>> A blog about science, health, human rights, and misopathy:
>> https://thekafkapandemic.blogspot.com
>>
>

Re: basic git

[Samuel Wales]

i did it a few times, it broke, i did what you did, which is really
the same except like -a, it works, i moved that to my dir, it works
for now.  thanks.  older git.

===

apropos of nothing, btw what does one do to make org these days?

make cleanall;make?  make oldorg?

as for other repos [i keep multiple copies for speed in switching for
testing] to clean up an old org with a local.mk do i just delete that
file?  can i keep doing make oldorg?


On 6/30/23, Dumitru Sipos <dumitru.sipos@gmail.com> wrote:
> It behaves quite normally on my side:
>
> $ git clone https://git.savannah.gnu.org/git/emacs/org-mode.git
> Cloning into 'org-mode'...
> remote: Counting objects: 141138, done.
> remote: Compressing objects: 100% (30420/30420), done.
> remote: Total 141138 (delta 110608), reused 141085 (delta 110576)
> Receiving objects: 100% (141138/141138), 96.60 MiB | 21.35 MiB/s, done.
> Resolving deltas: 100% (110608/110608), done.
>
> $ cd org-mode/
>
> $ git branch -a
> * main
>    remotes/origin/HEAD -> origin/main
>    remotes/origin/bugfix
>    remotes/origin/emacs-sync
>    remotes/origin/main
>
> $ git checkout bugfix
> branch 'bugfix' set up to track 'origin/bugfix'.
> Switched to a new branch 'bugfix'
>
> $ git branch -a
> * bugfix
>    main
>    remotes/origin/HEAD -> origin/main
>    remotes/origin/bugfix
>    remotes/origin/emacs-sync
>    remotes/origin/main
>
> $ git pull
> Already up to date.
>
> $ git pull origin bugfix
>  From https://git.savannah.gnu.org/git/emacs/org-mode
>   * branch                bugfix     -> FETCH_HEAD
> Already up to date.
>
> $ git --version
> git version 2.39.0
>
> On 30-Jun-23 08:56, Samuel Wales wrote:
>> how can a freshly cloned bugfix be any different from upstream?
>>
>> On 6/29/23, Samuel Wales <samologist@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> i pulled vanilla bugfix and got errors.  i deleted the repo, cloned
>>> org, did git checkout bugfix, pulled, and still got errors.
>>>
>>> git clone https://git.savannah.gnu.org/git/emacs/org-mode.git
>>>
>>> i am gitophobic.
>>>
>>> ===
>>> On branch bugfix
>>> Your branch and 'origin/bugfix' have diverged,
>>> and have 424 and 3 different commits each, respectively.
>>>    (use "git pull" to merge the remote branch into yours)
>>>
>>> You have unmerged paths.
>>>    (fix conflicts and run "git commit")
>>>    (use "git merge --abort" to abort the merge)
>>>
>>> Unmerged paths:
>>>    (use "git add <file>..." to mark resolution)
>>>
>>> 	both modified:   lisp/org.el
>>>
>>> no changes added to commit (use "git add" and/or "git commit -a")
>>> ===
>>>
>>> the merge conflict is
>>>
>>> <<<<<<< HEAD
>>> ;; Version: 9.7-pre
>>> =======
>>> ;; Version: 9.6.7
>>>>>>>>>> 7da765e459384f68d764589c94fd26472f1c3361
>>> thanks for anything that will get me back to my old habits of just
>>> having a repo and pulling it.
>>>
>>> p.s.  i HATE git.
>>>
>>> --
>>> The Kafka Pandemic
>>>
>>> A blog about science, health, human rights, and misopathy:
>>> https://thekafkapandemic.blogspot.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> The Kafka Pandemic
>>>
>>> A blog about science, health, human rights, and misopathy:
>>> https://thekafkapandemic.blogspot.com
>>>
>>
>
>


-- 
The Kafka Pandemic

A blog about science, health, human rights, and misopathy:
https://thekafkapandemic.blogspot.com

Re: basic git

[Max Nikulin]

On 30/06/2023 13:55, Samuel Wales wrote:
> the merge conflict is
> 
> <<<<<<< HEAD
> ;; Version: 9.7-pre
> =======
> ;; Version: 9.6.7
>>>>>>>> 7da765e459384f68d764589c94fd26472f1c3361

It looks like you tried to merge into the "bugfix" branch the "main" branch.

Do you have history of last git commands, e.g. in an emacs eshell 
buffer? Please, post them.

Likely the safe path is to keep ";; Version: 9.6.7" from the cited fragment,

      git add lisp/org.el
      git merge --continue

now create a temporary branch to not loose changes you may commit to 
local "bugfix" by mistake

     git branch tmp-bugfix-dirty

You will remove it as soon as you figure out that you changes are not 
lost. I suggest to store reflog to a temporary file

     git reflog | tee 2023-06-30_git-reflog.txt

it may help to restore how you came to this state.

I expect that

     git branch --show-current

reports "bugfix". To ensure it

     git checkout bugfix

to make your local "bugfix" branch matching the upstream one

     git reset --hard bugfix

Now you can inspect diff with tmp-bugfix-dirty and cherry-pick commits 
to the branch containing your changes on the top of "bugfix".

Git is a flexible and powerful tool.

Re: basic git

[Ihor Radchenko]

Samuel Wales <samologist@gmail.com> writes:

> apropos of nothing, btw what does one do to make org these days?
>
> make cleanall;make?  make oldorg?

Just make will trigger compilation.
make oldorg will also trigger building Info manual (in addition to compilation).
make cleanall is good to do to avoid Emacs re-using stale .elc files.


> as for other repos [i keep multiple copies for speed in switching for
> testing] to clean up an old org with a local.mk do i just delete that
> file?  can i keep doing make oldorg?

local.mk may need to be cleaned. Ideally, you just keep your specific
customizations there. Then, you do not need to clean it.

(I guess that the need to clean local.mk must not be necessary. But Org
does not do a great job defining some of the makefile settings)

-- 
Ihor Radchenko // yantar92,
Org mode contributor,
Learn more about Org mode at <https://orgmode.org/>.
Support Org development at <https://liberapay.com/org-mode>,
or support my work at <https://liberapay.com/yantar92>

Re: basic git

[Samuel Wales]

On 6/30/23, Max Nikulin <manikulin@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 30/06/2023 13:55, Samuel Wales wrote:
>> the merge conflict is
>>
>> <<<<<<< HEAD
>> ;; Version: 9.7-pre
>> =======
>> ;; Version: 9.6.7
>>>>>>>>> 7da765e459384f68d764589c94fd26472f1c3361
>
> It looks like you tried to merge into the "bugfix" branch the "main"
> branch.

i had no idea.

>
> Do you have history of last git commands, e.g. in an emacs eshell
> buffer? Please, post them.

would rather forget the trauma.  but there is amusement value to be
had by onlookers so here goes.

hehe you get to see all my git ignorance and try to wonder at what my
scritps do.

  502  ado git-pullv # says what's new etc.
  503  git branch --set-upstream-to=origin/bugfix bugfix
#i was told to do this.  it worked ok before.  but now it tells me i
have to do something.
  504  cd $delbig
  505  cd 9bugfix #symlink
  506  git status
  507  ado git-pullv
  508  git pull
  509  git fetch --tags origin #desperation sets in
  510  git status
  511  ado git-pullv
# this is the !@#$ it moment.  should work for sure.  ha ha.
  512  git clone https://git.savannah.gnu.org/git/emacs/org-mode.git
  513  mv org-mode ../new
  514  cd ..
  515  mv org-mode--vanilla-bugfix--ok-to-pull--xyzzy-nomost
../obsolescent--xyzzy-nomost/
  516  mv new org-mode--vanilla-bugfix--ok-to-pull--xyzzy-nomost
  517  cd org-mode--vanilla-bugfix--ok-to-pull--xyzzy-nomost
  518  git status
  519  git gc
  520  git status
  521  git branch bugfix
  522  git status
  523  git branch
  524  git checkout bugfix
  525  git status
  526  ado git-pullv
  527  ado diffoldnew cat .git/config
  528  git branch --set-upstream-to=origin/bugfix bugfix
  529  ado diffoldnew cat .git/config
#so i can s3ee what git does with its inscrutably seemingly suddenly
needed command
  530  git status
  531  git pullv
  532  ado git-pullv
  533  git fetch
  534  git merge --force #flailing around
  535  git status
  536  git pull
  537  git pull --theirs #i just want upstream
  538  git status
  539  git merge --abort #well it said i could didn't it?
  540  git status
  541  git pull --their
  542  git --theirs pull
  543  git pull --theirs
  544  git branch
  545  git branch asdfasdf
  546  git branch
  547  git branch -d associated
  548  git branch -d asdfasdf
  549  git branch #ok i get that it doesn't change branches by now
  553  u;eagenda
  554  lt
  555  cd /tmp
  556  git clone https://git.savannah.gnu.org/git/emacs/org-mode.git
#try again, as i did all that weird wrong stuff
  557  cd org-mode
  558  ,git branch -a
  559  git branch -a
  560  git checkout bugfix
  561  git branch -a
  562  git pull
  563  git pull origin bugfix
  564  cd ..
  565  pd
  566  cd $delbit
  567  lt
  568  cd $delbig
  569  lt
  570  rmg org-mode--vanilla-bugfix--ok-to-pull--xyzzy-nomost
  571  mv /tmp/org-mode org-mode--vanilla-bugfix--ok-to-pull--xyzzy-nomost
  572  cd org-mode--vanilla-bugfix--ok-to-pull--xyzzy-nomost
  573  git status
  574  ado git-pullv
# ok it works

> Git is a flexible and powerful tool.

cannot disagree but also it is one which is too much for me most of
the time given my cognitive decline.  i try to stick to the basics and
it throws me into stress territory when even just blowing away the
existing and cloning doesn't work.

sticking to the basics /usually/ works.  yeah, it's a dag, you
checkout stuff, you avoid fancy stuff like plutonium.  actiually it
can have muluple roots but never mind that. git is like they say about
war.  boredom punctuated by terror.

-- 
The Kafka Pandemic

A blog about science, health, human rights, and misopathy:
https://thekafkapandemic.blogspot.com

Re: basic git

[Max Nikulin]

On 01/07/2023 05:15, Samuel Wales wrote:
> On 6/30/23, Max Nikulin wrote:
>> Do you have history of last git commands, e.g. in an emacs eshell
>> buffer? Please, post them.

It is unclear what was the current branch before (a custom local one, 
"bugfix" or "main" tracking the upstream) and whether all local changes 
were committed.

>    502  ado git-pullv # says what's new etc.

I have no idea concerning "ado" and "git-pullv". The "git pull" command 
should add changes from the tracked remote branch to your local one.

>    503  git branch --set-upstream-to=origin/bugfix bugfix
> #i was told to do this.  it worked ok before.  but now it tells me i
> have to do something.

This command was necessary just once per local branch when you were 
switching from the orgmode.org git repository to savannah. Another use 
case is when you want associate a new local branch with a remote one.

>    504  cd $delbig
>    505  cd 9bugfix #symlink

So the commands above and below were executed in unrelated clones.

>    506  git status
>    507  ado git-pullv
>    508  git pull
>    509  git fetch --tags origin #desperation sets in

"git pull" should fetch changes from the remote branch. "git fetch" 
obtains changes for all remote branches (remotes/origin/bugfix, etc.) 
without touching the local one. So "git fetch" should not break anything.

Perhaps you had a branch that was tracking remotes/origin/main, you 
forced to set tracked branch to remotes/origin/bugfix and "git pull" 
failed in the process of merging changes from these branches. Usually 
the reasonable action is to abort by the command suggested in the "git 
status" output to get the state before "git pull".

>    510  git status
>    511  ado git-pullv
> # this is the !@#$ it moment.  should work for sure.  ha ha.
>    512  git clone https://git.savannah.gnu.org/git/emacs/org-mode.git
>    513  mv org-mode ../new
>    514  cd ..
>    515  mv org-mode--vanilla-bugfix--ok-to-pull--xyzzy-nomost
> ../obsolescent--xyzzy-nomost/
>    516  mv new org-mode--vanilla-bugfix--ok-to-pull--xyzzy-nomost
>    517  cd org-mode--vanilla-bugfix--ok-to-pull--xyzzy-nomost

I am lost whether you are in the directory with the fresh clone. I would 
assume it.

>    518  git status
>    519  git gc

Unnecessary in a fresh clone. You may make it impossible recover local 
changes if you run it when you are unsure where you are. Will you throw 
away garbage when you lost some precious thing and there is a chance 
that you put it into the bin with a heap of other stuff?

>    520  git status
>    521  git branch bugfix

This may be a cause of confusion. The default branch of the org 
repository is "main" (am I right?) and in the fresh clone you should be 
on "main". By this command you created a local branch named "bugfix" but 
unrelated to the upstream branch. The current (HEAD) commit of the local 
"bugfix" points to the current commit.

>    522  git status
>    523  git branch
>    524  git checkout bugfix

This would be a correct command that creates local "bugfix" tracking 
remote "bugfix" unless you executed "git branch bugfix" before. Now you 
are on a commit from "main".

>    525  git status
>    526  ado git-pullv
>    527  ado diffoldnew cat .git/config
>    528  git branch --set-upstream-to=origin/bugfix bugfix

I may be wrong with my assumption, but you created local "bugfix" 
pointing to a commit from remotes/origin/main and forced it to track 
remotes/origin/bugfix. The message from your first post is the plausible 
consequence of "git pull" from this state.

If you goal is a clean clone with "bugfix" as the current branch you may do

     git clone https://git.savannah.gnu.org/git/emacs/org-mode.git \
         org-mode--vanilla-bugfix--ok-to-pull--xyzzy-nomost
     cd org-mode--vanilla-bugfix--ok-to-pull--xyzzy-nomost
     git checkout bugfix

Do you need to recover commits with your local changes or your are 
experimenting with clean upstream "bugfix" and "main" branches?