diff options
| -rw-r--r-- | README | 580 |
1 files changed, 291 insertions, 289 deletions
@@ -1,9 +1,8 @@ - - +//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// GIT - the stupid content tracker - +//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// "git" can mean anything, depending on your mood. - random three-letter combination that is pronounceable, and not @@ -22,16 +21,13 @@ contents efficiently. There are two object abstractions: the "object database", and the "current directory cache" aka "index". - - - The Object Database (GIT_OBJECT_DIRECTORY) - - +The Object Database +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The object database is literally just a content-addressable collection of objects. All objects are named by their content, which is approximated by the SHA1 hash of the object itself. Objects may refer -to other objects (by referencing their SHA1 hash), and so you can build -up a hierarchy of objects. +to other objects (by referencing their SHA1 hash), and so you can +build up a hierarchy of objects. All objects have a statically determined "type" aka "tag", which is determined at object creation time, and which identifies the format of @@ -62,12 +58,17 @@ has two or more separate roots as its ultimate parents, that's probably just going to confuse people. So aim for the notion of "one root object per project", even if git itself does not enforce that. +A "tag" object symbolically identifies and can be used to sign other +objects. It contains the identifier and type of another object, a +symbolic name (of course!) and, optionally, a signature. + Regardless of object type, all objects are share the following characteristics: they are all in deflated with zlib, and have a header that not only specifies their tag, but also size information about the data in the object. It's worth noting that the SHA1 hash that is used -to name the object is always the hash of this _compressed_ object, not -the original data. +to name the object is the hash of the original data (historical note: +in the dawn of the age of git this was the sha1 of the _compressed_ +object) As a result, the general consistency of an object can always be tested independently of the contents or the type of the object: all objects can @@ -76,157 +77,162 @@ file and (b) the object successfully inflates to a stream of bytes that forms a sequence of <ascii tag without space> + <space> + <ascii decimal size> + <byte\0> + <binary object data>. -The structured objects can further have their structure and connectivity -to other objects verified. This is generally done with the "fsck-cache" -program, which generates a full dependency graph of all objects, and -verifies their internal consistency (in addition to just verifying their -superficial consistency through the hash). +The structured objects can further have their structure and +connectivity to other objects verified. This is generally done with +the "fsck-cache" program, which generates a full dependency graph of +all objects, and verifies their internal consistency (in addition to +just verifying their superficial consistency through the hash). The object types in some more detail: - BLOB: A "blob" object is nothing but a binary blob of data, and - doesn't refer to anything else. There is no signature or any - other verification of the data, so while the object is - consistent (it _is_ indexed by its sha1 hash, so the data itself - is certainly correct), it has absolutely no other attributes. - No name associations, no permissions. It is purely a blob of - data (i.e. normally "file contents"). - - In particular, since the blob is entirely defined by its data, - if two files in a directory tree (or in multiple different - versions of the repository) have the same contents, they will - share the same blob object. The object is totally independent - of it's location in the directory tree, and renaming a file does - not change the object that file is associated with in any way. - - TREE: The next hierarchical object type is the "tree" object. A tree - object is a list of mode/name/blob data, sorted by name. - Alternatively, the mode data may specify a directory mode, in - which case instead of naming a blob, that name is associated - with another TREE object. - - Like the "blob" object, a tree object is uniquely determined by - the set contents, and so two separate but identical trees will - always share the exact same object. This is true at all levels, - i.e. it's true for a "leaf" tree (which does not refer to any - other trees, only blobs) as well as for a whole subdirectory. - - For that reason a "tree" object is just a pure data abstraction: - it has no history, no signatures, no verification of validity, - except that since the contents are again protected by the hash - itself, we can trust that the tree is immutable and its contents - never change. - - So you can trust the contents of a tree to be valid, the same - way you can trust the contents of a blob, but you don't know - where those contents _came_ from. - - Side note on trees: since a "tree" object is a sorted list of - "filename+content", you can create a diff between two trees - without actually having to unpack two trees. Just ignore all - common parts, and your diff will look right. In other words, - you can effectively (and efficiently) tell the difference - between any two random trees by O(n) where "n" is the size of - the difference, rather than the size of the tree. - - Side note 2 on trees: since the name of a "blob" depends - entirely and exclusively on its contents (i.e. there are no names - or permissions involved), you can see trivial renames or - permission changes by noticing that the blob stayed the same. - However, renames with data changes need a smarter "diff" implementation. - -CHANGESET: The "changeset" object is an object that introduces the - notion of history into the picture. In contrast to the other - objects, it doesn't just describe the physical state of a tree, - it describes how we got there, and why. - - A "changeset" is defined by the tree-object that it results in, - the parent changesets (zero, one or more) that led up to that - point, and a comment on what happened. Again, a changeset is - not trusted per se: the contents are well-defined and "safe" due - to the cryptographically strong signatures at all levels, but - there is no reason to believe that the tree is "good" or that - the merge information makes sense. The parents do not have to - actually have any relationship with the result, for example. - - Note on changesets: unlike real SCM's, changesets do not contain - rename information or file mode change information. All of that - is implicit in the trees involved (the result tree, and the - result trees of the parents), and describing that makes no sense - in this idiotic file manager. - -TRUST: The notion of "trust" is really outside the scope of "git", but - it's worth noting a few things. First off, since everything is - hashed with SHA1, you _can_ trust that an object is intact and - has not been messed with by external sources. So the name of an - object uniquely identifies a known state - just not a state that - you may want to trust. - - Furthermore, since the SHA1 signature of a changeset refers to - the SHA1 signatures of the tree it is associated with and the - signatures of the parent, a single named changeset specifies - uniquely a whole set of history, with full contents. You can't - later fake any step of the way once you have the name of a - changeset. - - So to introduce some real trust in the system, the only thing - you need to do is to digitally sign just _one_ special note, - which includes the name of a top-level changeset. Your digital - signature shows others that you trust that changeset, and the - immutability of the history of changesets tells others that they - can trust the whole history. - - In other words, you can easily validate a whole archive by just - sending out a single email that tells the people the name (SHA1 - hash) of the top changeset, and digitally sign that email using - something like GPG/PGP. - - In particular, you can also have a separate archive of "trust - points" or tags, which document your (and other peoples) trust. - You may, of course, archive these "certificates of trust" using - "git" itself, but it's not something "git" does for you. - -Another way of saying the last point: "git" itself only handles content -integrity, the trust has to come from outside. - - - - The "index" aka "Current Directory Cache" (".git/index") - - +Blob Object +~~~~~~~~~~~ +A "blob" object is nothing but a binary blob of data, and doesn't +refer to anything else. There is no signature or any other +verification of the data, so while the object is consistent (it _is_ +indexed by its sha1 hash, so the data itself is certainly correct), it +has absolutely no other attributes. No name associations, no +permissions. It is purely a blob of data (i.e. normally "file +contents"). + +In particular, since the blob is entirely defined by its data, if two +files in a directory tree (or in multiple different versions of the +repository) have the same contents, they will share the same blob +object. The object is totally independent of it's location in the +directory tree, and renaming a file does not change the object that +file is associated with in any way. + +Tree Object +~~~~~~~~~~~ +The next hierarchical object type is the "tree" object. A tree object +is a list of mode/name/blob data, sorted by name. Alternatively, the +mode data may specify a directory mode, in which case instead of +naming a blob, that name is associated with another TREE object. + +Like the "blob" object, a tree object is uniquely determined by the +set contents, and so two separate but identical trees will always +share the exact same object. This is true at all levels, i.e. it's +true for a "leaf" tree (which does not refer to any other trees, only +blobs) as well as for a whole subdirectory. + +For that reason a "tree" object is just a pure data abstraction: it +has no history, no signatures, no verification of validity, except +that since the contents are again protected by the hash itself, we can +trust that the tree is immutable and its contents never change. + +So you can trust the contents of a tree to be valid, the same way you +can trust the contents of a blob, but you don't know where those +contents _came_ from. + +Side note on trees: since a "tree" object is a sorted list of +"filename+content", you can create a diff between two trees without +actually having to unpack two trees. Just ignore all common parts, +and your diff will look right. In other words, you can effectively +(and efficiently) tell the difference between any two random trees by +O(n) where "n" is the size of the difference, rather than the size of +the tree. + +Side note 2 on trees: since the name of a "blob" depends entirely and +exclusively on its contents (i.e. there are no names or permissions +involved), you can see trivial renames or permission changes by +noticing that the blob stayed the same. However, renames with data +changes need a smarter "diff" implementation. + + +Changeset Object +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ +The "changeset" object is an object that introduces the notion of +history into the picture. In contrast to the other objects, it +doesn't just describe the physical state of a tree, it describes how +we got there, and why. + +A "changeset" is defined by the tree-object that it results in, the +parent changesets (zero, one or more) that led up to that point, and a +comment on what happened. Again, a changeset is not trusted per se: +the contents are well-defined and "safe" due to the cryptographically +strong signatures at all levels, but there is no reason to believe +that the tree is "good" or that the merge information makes sense. +The parents do not have to actually have any relationship with the +result, for example. + +Note on changesets: unlike real SCM's, changesets do not contain +rename information or file mode change information. All of that is +implicit in the trees involved (the result tree, and the result trees +of the parents), and describing that makes no sense in this idiotic +file manager. + +Trust Object +~~~~~~~~~~~~ +The notion of "trust" is really outside the scope of "git", but it's +worth noting a few things. First off, since everything is hashed with +SHA1, you _can_ trust that an object is intact and has not been messed +with by external sources. So the name of an object uniquely +identifies a known state - just not a state that you may want to +trust. + +Furthermore, since the SHA1 signature of a changeset refers to the +SHA1 signatures of the tree it is associated with and the signatures +of the parent, a single named changeset specifies uniquely a whole set +of history, with full contents. You can't later fake any step of the +way once you have the name of a changeset. + +So to introduce some real trust in the system, the only thing you need +to do is to digitally sign just _one_ special note, which includes the +name of a top-level changeset. Your digital signature shows others +that you trust that changeset, and the immutability of the history of +changesets tells others that they can trust the whole history. + +In other words, you can easily validate a whole archive by just +sending out a single email that tells the people the name (SHA1 hash) +of the top changeset, and digitally sign that email using something +like GPG/PGP. + +In particular, you can also have a separate archive of "trust points" +or tags, which document your (and other peoples) trust. You may, of +course, archive these "certificates of trust" using "git" itself, but +it's not something "git" does for you. + +Another way of saying the last point: "git" itself only handles +content integrity, the trust has to come from outside. + + + + +The "index" aka "Current Directory Cache" +----------------------------------------- The index is a simple binary file, which contains an efficient representation of a virtual directory content at some random time. It does so by a simple array that associates a set of names, dates, permissions and content (aka "blob") objects together. The cache is always kept ordered by name, and names are unique (with a few very specific rules) at any point in time, but the cache has no long-term -meaning, and can be partially updated at any time. +meaning, and can be partially updated at any time. In particular, the index certainly does not need to be consistent with the current directory contents (in fact, most operations will depend on different ways to make the index _not_ be consistent with the directory hierarchy), but it has three very important attributes: - (a) it can re-generate the full state it caches (not just the directory - structure: it contains pointers to the "blob" objects so that it - can regenerate the data too) +'(a) it can re-generate the full state it caches (not just the +directory structure: it contains pointers to the "blob" objects so +that it can regenerate the data too)' - As a special case, there is a clear and unambiguous one-way mapping - from a current directory cache to a "tree object", which can be - efficiently created from just the current directory cache without - actually looking at any other data. So a directory cache at any - one time uniquely specifies one and only one "tree" object (but - has additional data to make it easy to match up that tree object - with what has happened in the directory) +As a special case, there is a clear and unambiguous one-way mapping +from a current directory cache to a "tree object", which can be +efficiently created from just the current directory cache without +actually looking at any other data. So a directory cache at any one +time uniquely specifies one and only one "tree" object (but has +additional data to make it easy to match up that tree object with what +has happened in the directory) - (b) it has efficient methods for finding inconsistencies between that - cached state ("tree object waiting to be instantiated") and the - current state. +'(b) it has efficient methods for finding inconsistencies between that +cached state ("tree object waiting to be instantiated") and the +current state.' - (c) it can additionally efficiently represent information about merge - conflicts between different tree objects, allowing each pathname to - be associated with sufficient information about the trees involved - that you can create a three-way merge between them. +'(c) it can additionally efficiently represent information about merge +conflicts between different tree objects, allowing each pathname to be +associated with sufficient information about the trees involved that +you can create a three-way merge between them.' Those are the three ONLY things that the directory cache does. It's a cache, and the normal operation is to re-generate it completely from a @@ -241,220 +247,216 @@ involves a controlled modification of the index file. In particular, the index file can have the representation of an intermediate tree that has not yet been instantiated. So the index can be thought of as a write-back cache, which can contain dirty information that has not yet -been written back to the backing store. +been written back to the backing store. - The Workflow - - +The Workflow +------------ Generally, all "git" operations work on the index file. Some operations -work _purely_ on the index file (showing the current state of the +work *purely* on the index file (showing the current state of the index), but most operations move data to and from the index file. Either from the database or from the working directory. Thus there are four main combinations: - 1) working directory -> index +1) working directory -> index +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ - You update the index with information from the working directory - with the "update-cache" command. You generally update the index - information by just specifying the filename you want to update, - like so: +You update the index with information from the working directory with +the "update-cache" command. You generally update the index +information by just specifying the filename you want to update, like +so: update-cache filename - but to avoid common mistakes with filename globbing etc, the - command will not normally add totally new entries or remove old - entries, i.e. it will normally just update existing cache entries. +but to avoid common mistakes with filename globbing etc, the command +will not normally add totally new entries or remove old entries, +i.e. it will normally just update existing cache entries. - To tell git that yes, you really do realize that certain files - no longer exist in the archive, or that new files should be - added, you should use the "--remove" and "--add" flags - respectively. +To tell git that yes, you really do realize that certain files no +longer exist in the archive, or that new files should be added, you +should use the "--remove" and "--add" flags respectively. - NOTE! A "--remove" flag does _not_ mean that subsequent - filenames will necessarily be removed: if the files still exist - in your directory structure, the index will be updated with - their new status, not removed. The only thing "--remove" means - is that update-cache will be considering a removed file to be a - valid thing, and if the file really does not exist any more, it - will update the index accordingly. +NOTE! A "--remove" flag does _not_ mean that subsequent filenames will +necessarily be removed: if the files still exist in your directory +structure, the index will be updated with their new status, not +removed. The only thing "--remove" means is that update-cache will be +considering a removed file to be a valid thing, and if the file really +does not exist any more, it will update the index accordingly. - As a special case, you can also do "update-cache --refresh", - which will refresh the "stat" information of each index to match - the current stat information. It will _not_ update the object - status itself, and it will only update the fields that are used - to quickly test whether an object still matches its old backing - store object. +As a special case, you can also do "update-cache --refresh", which +will refresh the "stat" information of each index to match the current +stat information. It will _not_ update the object status itself, and +it will only update the fields that are used to quickly test whether +an object still matches its old backing store object. - 2) index -> object database +2) index -> object database +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ - You write your current index file to a "tree" object with the - program +You write your current index file to a "tree" object with the program write-tree - that doesn't come with any options - it will just write out the - current index into the set of tree objects that describe that - state, and it will return the name of the resulting top-level - tree. You can use that tree to re-generate the index at any time - by going in the other direction: +that doesn't come with any options - it will just write out the +current index into the set of tree objects that describe that state, +and it will return the name of the resulting top-level tree. You can +use that tree to re-generate the index at any time by going in the +other direction: - 3) object database -> index +3) object database -> index +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ - You read a "tree" file from the object database, and use that to - populate (and overwrite - don't do this if your index contains - any unsaved state that you might want to restore later!) your - current index. Normal operation is just +You read a "tree" file from the object database, and use that to +populate (and overwrite - don't do this if your index contains any +unsaved state that you might want to restore later!) your current +index. Normal operation is just read-tree <sha1 of tree> - and your index file will now be equivalent to the tree that you - saved earlier. However, that is only your _index_ file: your - working directory contents have not been modified. +and your index file will now be equivalent to the tree that you saved +earlier. However, that is only your _index_ file: your working +directory contents have not been modified. - 4) index -> working directory +4) index -> working directory +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ - You update your working directory from the index by "checking - out" files. This is not a very common operation, since normally - you'd just keep your files updated, and rather than write to - your working directory, you'd tell the index files about the - changes in your working directory (i.e. "update-cache"). +You update your working directory from the index by "checking out" +files. This is not a very common operation, since normally you'd just +keep your files updated, and rather than write to your working +directory, you'd tell the index files about the changes in your +working directory (i.e. "update-cache"). - However, if you decide to jump to a new version, or check out - somebody else's version, or just restore a previous tree, you'd - populate your index file with read-tree, and then you need to - check out the result with +However, if you decide to jump to a new version, or check out somebody +else's version, or just restore a previous tree, you'd populate your +index file with read-tree, and then you need to check out the result +with checkout-cache filename - or, if you want to check out all of the index, use "-a". +or, if you want to check out all of the index, use "-a". - NOTE! checkout-cache normally refuses to overwrite old files, so - if you have an old version of the tree already checked out, you - will need to use the "-f" flag (_before_ the "-a" flag or the - filename) to _force_ the checkout. +NOTE! checkout-cache normally refuses to overwrite old files, so if +you have an old version of the tree already checked out, you will need +to use the "-f" flag (_before_ the "-a" flag or the filename) to +_force_ the checkout. -Finally, there are a few odds and ends which are not purely moving from -one representation to the other: +Finally, there are a few odds and ends which are not purely moving +from one representation to the other: - 5) Tying it all together +5) Tying it all together +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ - To commit a tree you have instantiated with "write-tree", you'd - create a "commit" object that refers to that tree and the - history behind it - most notably the "parent" commits that - preceded it in history. +To commit a tree you have instantiated with "write-tree", you'd create +a "commit" object that refers to that tree and the history behind it - +most notably the "parent" commits that preceded it in history. - Normally a "commit" has one parent: the previous state of the - tree before a certain change was made. However, sometimes it can - have two or more parent commits, in which case we call it a - "merge", due to the fact that such a commit brings together - ("merges") two or more previous states represented by other - commits. +Normally a "commit" has one parent: the previous state of the tree +before a certain change was made. However, sometimes it can have two +or more parent commits, in which case we call it a "merge", due to the +fact that such a commit brings together ("merges") two or more +previous states represented by other commits. - In other words, while a "tree" represents a particular directory - state of a working directory, a "commit" represents that state - in "time", and explains how we got there. +In other words, while a "tree" represents a particular directory state +of a working directory, a "commit" represents that state in "time", +and explains how we got there. - You create a commit object by giving it the tree that describes - the state at the time of the commit, and a list of parents: +You create a commit object by giving it the tree that describes the +state at the time of the commit, and a list of parents: commit-tree <tree> -p <parent> [-p <parent2> ..] - and then giving the reason for the commit on stdin (either - through redirection from a pipe or file, or by just typing it at - the tty). +and then giving the reason for the commit on stdin (either through +redirection from a pipe or file, or by just typing it at the tty). - commit-tree will return the name of the object that represents - that commit, and you should save it away for later use. - Normally, you'd commit a new "HEAD" state, and while git doesn't - care where you save the note about that state, in practice we - tend to just write the result to the file ".git/HEAD", so that - we can always see what the last committed state was. +commit-tree will return the name of the object that represents that +commit, and you should save it away for later use. Normally, you'd +commit a new "HEAD" state, and while git doesn't care where you save +the note about that state, in practice we tend to just write the +result to the file ".git/HEAD", so that we can always see what the +last committed state was. - 6) Examining the data +6) Examining the data +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ - You can examine the data represented in the object database and - the index with various helper tools. For every object, you can - use "cat-file" to examine details about the object: +You can examine the data represented in the object database and the +index with various helper tools. For every object, you can use +"cat-file" to examine details about the object: cat-file -t <objectname> - shows the type of the object, and once you have the type (which - is usually implicit in where you find the object), you can use +shows the type of the object, and once you have the type (which is +usually implicit in where you find the object), you can use cat-file blob|tree|commit <objectname> - to show its contents. NOTE! Trees have binary content, and as a - result there is a special helper for showing that content, - called "ls-tree", which turns the binary content into a more - easily readable form. +to show its contents. NOTE! Trees have binary content, and as a result +there is a special helper for showing that content, called "ls-tree", +which turns the binary content into a more easily readable form. - It's especially instructive to look at "commit" objects, since - those tend to be small and fairly self-explanatory. In - particular, if you follow the convention of having the top - commit name in ".git/HEAD", you can do +It's especially instructive to look at "commit" objects, since those +tend to be small and fairly self-explanatory. In particular, if you +follow the convention of having the top commit name in ".git/HEAD", +you can do cat-file commit $(cat .git/HEAD) - to see what the top commit was. +to see what the top commit was. - 7) Merging multiple trees +7) Merging multiple trees +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ - Git helps you do a three-way merge, which you can expand to - n-way by repeating the merge procedure arbitrary times until you - finally "commit" the state. The normal situation is that you'd - only do one three-way merge (two parents), and commit it, but if - you like to, you can do multiple parents in one go. +Git helps you do a three-way merge, which you can expand to n-way by +repeating the merge procedure arbitrary times until you finally +"commit" the state. The normal situation is that you'd only do one +three-way merge (two parents), and commit it, but if you like to, you +can do multiple parents in one go. - To do a three-way merge, you need the two sets of "commit" - objects that you want to merge, use those to find the closest - common parent (a third "commit" object), and then use those - commit objects to find the state of the directory ("tree" - object) at these points. +To do a three-way merge, you need the two sets of "commit" objects +that you want to merge, use those to find the closest common parent (a +third "commit" object), and then use those commit objects to find the +state of the directory ("tree" object) at these points. - To get the "base" for the merge, you first look up the common - parent of two commits with +To get the "base" for the merge, you first look up the common parent +of two commits with merge-base <commit1> <commit2> - which will return you the commit they are both based on. You - should now look up the "tree" objects of those commits, which - you can easily do with (for example) +which will return you the commit they are both based on. You should +now look up the "tree" objects of those commits, which you can easily +do with (for example) cat-file commit <commitname> | head -1 - since the tree object information is always the first line in a - commit object. +since the tree object information is always the first line in a commit +object. + +Once you know the three trees you are going to merge (the one +"original" tree, aka the common case, and the two "result" trees, aka +the branches you want to merge), you do a "merge" read into the +index. This will throw away your old index contents, so you should +make sure that you've committed those - in fact you would normally +always do a merge against your last commit (which should thus match +what you have in your current index anyway). - Once you know the three trees you are going to merge (the one - "original" tree, aka the common case, and the two "result" trees, - aka the branches you want to merge), you do a "merge" read into - the index. This will throw away your old index contents, so you - should make sure that you've committed those - in fact you would - normally always do a merge against your last commit (which - should thus match what you have in your current index anyway). - To do the merge, do +To do the merge, do read-tree -m <origtree> <target1tree> <target2tree> - which will do all trivial merge operations for you directly in - the index file, and you can just write the result out with - "write-tree". +which will do all trivial merge operations for you directly in the +index file, and you can just write the result out with "write-tree". - NOTE! Because the merge is done in the index file, and not in - your working directory, your working directory will no longer - match your index. You can use "checkout-cache -f -a" to make the - effect of the merge be seen in your working directory. +NOTE! Because the merge is done in the index file, and not in your +working directory, your working directory will no longer match your +index. You can use "checkout-cache -f -a" to make the effect of the +merge be seen in your working directory. - NOTE2! Sadly, many merges aren't trivial. If there are files - that have been added.moved or removed, or if both branches have - modified the same file, you will be left with an index tree that - contains "merge entries" in it. Such an index tree can _NOT_ be - written out to a tree object, and you will have to resolve any - such merge clashes using other tools before you can write out - the result. +NOTE2! Sadly, many merges aren't trivial. If there are files that have +been added.moved or removed, or if both branches have modified the +same file, you will be left with an index tree that contains "merge +entries" in it. Such an index tree can _NOT_ be written out to a tree +object, and you will have to resolve any such merge clashes using +other tools before you can write out the result. - [ fixme: talk about resolving merges here ] +[ fixme: talk about resolving merges here ] |