Re: Where should git-prompt.sh be installed?
Would that not give the impression of git sh-prompt being a core command? If so, that would be poor, IMHO. When I was investigating this last night, I expected to find it (git-prompt.sh) in contrib, although that doesn't make an enormous amount of sense. Ideally, the full path to wherever it's installed should be mentioned in the bash completion file (which is where I went to look when __git_ps1 stopped working), but that would mean modifying a file from upstream and I'm not sure if that's easy/the done thing. Danny. On 25 Oct 2012, at 01:51, Jonathan Nieder jrnie...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, In olden days the admin would copy contrib/completion/git-completion.sh to /etc/bash_completion.d/git and mortals could source /etc/bash_completion or /etc/bash_completion.d/git in their ~/.bashrc (possibly shared among multiple machines) so that the bash completion and __git_ps1 helpers could work. With Git 1.7.12 __git_ps1 has been split into a separate file, to help users who only want __git_ps1 to avoid the overhead of loading the entire completion script (and allow the completion script to be loaded by bash-completion magic on the fly!). Now the sysadmin should copy contrib/completion/git-completion.sh to /usr/share/bash-completion/completions/git and contrib/completion/git-prompt.sh to /usr/share/git-core/contrib/?? (somewhere?) Mortals source /etc/bash_completion in their ~/.bashrc (possibly shared among multiple machines) and expect bash completion to work. For __git_ps1, users should source that ?? path. Questions: 1) what path is appropriate for ?? above? 2) is this documented anywhere? Possible answers: 1) Fedora uses /etc/profile.d/git-prompt.sh. Gentoo uses /usr/share/bash-completion/git-prompt. Maybe others use some other path. 2) The scripts themselves suggest copying to ~/.git-completion.sh and ~/.git-prompt.sh. Proposal: 1) /usr/lib/git-core/git-sh-prompt 2) git-sh-prompt(1) Sensible? Thanks, Jonathan -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe git in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: Where should git-prompt.sh be installed?
On 10/25/2012 02:02 AM, Danny Yates wrote: Would that not give the impression of git sh-prompt being a core command? No more than git-sh-setup, which already works like that. Unless perhaps by “core” you mean “not contrib”. (Now that I think of it, I saw a request from an Ubuntu PPA user last week to install git-subtree in a more accessible location, and there’s a similar request about gitview at https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/152212 . These are less critical since the Debian package puts them in /usr/share/doc/git/contrib. Is it a good idea to package those somewhere like /usr/lib/git-core or /usr/bin, or is that a dangerous slippery slope? I dunno.) Anders -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe git in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: Where should git-prompt.sh be installed?
On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 05:51:06PM -0700, Jonathan Nieder wrote: Hi, In olden days the admin would copy contrib/completion/git-completion.sh to /etc/bash_completion.d/git and mortals could source /etc/bash_completion or /etc/bash_completion.d/git in their ~/.bashrc (possibly shared among multiple machines) so that the bash completion and __git_ps1 helpers could work. Ah, the good old days! I even modified 'make install' to copy the completion script to /etc/bash_completion.d/. And I was happy. With Git 1.7.12 __git_ps1 has been split into a separate file, to help users who only want __git_ps1 to avoid the overhead of loading the entire completion script (and allow the completion script to be loaded by bash-completion magic on the fly!). Now the sysadmin should copy contrib/completion/git-completion.sh to /usr/share/bash-completion/completions/git and contrib/completion/git-prompt.sh to /usr/share/git-core/contrib/?? (somewhere?) Mortals source /etc/bash_completion in their ~/.bashrc (possibly shared among multiple machines) and expect bash completion to work. For __git_ps1, users should source that ?? path. Questions: 1) what path is appropriate for ?? above? 2) is this documented anywhere? Don't know what is appropriate, and it's not documented. I for one copy it manually to ~/.git-prompt.sh every once in a while. And I'm not all that happy with that. Possible answers: 1) Fedora uses /etc/profile.d/git-prompt.sh. Gentoo uses /usr/share/bash-completion/git-prompt. Maybe others use some other path. 2) The scripts themselves suggest copying to ~/.git-completion.sh and ~/.git-prompt.sh. Proposal: 1) /usr/lib/git-core/git-sh-prompt 2) git-sh-prompt(1) Not sure about the sh part. The prompt function is very Bash-specific, it won't work under a plain POSIX shell. Do other VCSes have similar prompt scripts? Where do they install theirs? Gábor -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe git in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: Where should git-prompt.sh be installed?
SZEDER Gábor wrote: On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 05:51:06PM -0700, Jonathan Nieder wrote: Proposal: 1) /usr/lib/git-core/git-sh-prompt 2) git-sh-prompt(1) Not sure about the sh part. The prompt function is very Bash-specific, it won't work under a plain POSIX shell. That's an interesting point. Here's my logic: The prompt function was originally Bash-specific, but over time it gained support for Zsh as well. If we're lucky, some day it might gain support for mksh. Meanwhile something simple like git-prompt would sound too much like a normal git command, I fear. Shell language extensions used: * future standard: local variables * cosmetic: [[ and (( syntax in place of test and $( * cosmetic: for ((n=1; n = n_stop; n++)) instead of a more explicit while loop * cosmetic: var+=value syntax * optimization: syntax to iterate over lines in a variable instead of, for example, sed + eval * arrays: svn_remote, svn_upstream --- using plain variables would require some escaping. So nothing fundamental, but since this is only useful in shells like Bash that support command substitution in $PS1, it seems reasonable to keep using the extensions until someone wants to use it with a more limited shell. In other words, the interface is still this is a scriptlet you might source in your Bourne-style shell to get a __git_ps1 function to use in your prompt. The implementation language just happens not to be POSIX shell today. Perhaps it should return early in shells other than bash and zsh to help people keep their .shrc simple. What do you think? Do other VCSes have similar prompt scripts? Where do they install theirs? Mercurial has an hg-prompt extension that can be used by running hg prompt. http://mercurial.selenic.com/wiki/PromptExtension I haven't found one for Subversion. Bazaar has contrib/bash/bzrbashprompt.sh. It doesn't get installed. Thanks, Jonathan -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe git in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: Where should git-prompt.sh be installed?
On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 8:51 PM, Jonathan Nieder jrnie...@gmail.com wrote: Now the sysadmin should copy contrib/completion/git-completion.sh to /usr/share/bash-completion/completions/git and contrib/completion/git-prompt.sh to /usr/share/git-core/contrib/?? (somewhere?) Mortals source /etc/bash_completion in their ~/.bashrc (possibly shared among multiple machines) and expect bash completion to work. For __git_ps1, users should source that ?? path. Questions: 1) what path is appropriate for ?? above? 2) is this documented anywhere? Possible answers: 1) Fedora uses /etc/profile.d/git-prompt.sh. Gentoo uses /usr/share/bash-completion/git-prompt. Maybe others use some other path. 2) The scripts themselves suggest copying to ~/.git-completion.sh and ~/.git-prompt.sh. Proposal: 1) /usr/lib/git-core/git-sh-prompt 2) git-sh-prompt(1) Sensible? Does the LSB provide any guidance? If not, or if such guidance isn't helpful, I say that looks reasonable. What I'd like to know is why we are saying copy when symlinking is likely to be more easily maintainable? (Less chance to screw up.) -- -Drew Northup -- As opposed to vegetable or mineral error? -John Pescatore, SANS NewsBites Vol. 12 Num. 59 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe git in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
