I have seen Remove file from a commit in Mercurial - but I have very little experience with Mercurial, so I'd like to ask and make sure if this is doable, and how.
There is a software that is developed in Mercurial, and I wanted to try and add a feature. So when I cloned the repo, first I did was added my own branch, and started hacking there. Already in first or second commit of this branch, I added multiple files hg add test1.bmp, hg add test2.bmp and so on, and committed.
Then I kept on hacking other files (haven't touched these test1.bmp, test2.bmp etc since), and made about 3 or 4 commits after the commit where the bmps are added. Nothing has been pushed anywhere - my local copy of the Mercurial repo and my branch in it is the only place where these files are referenced. And just now I realize I shouldn't have added those files at all.
Is it possible to remove these files from all of the commits where they feature, since the first commit where they were added?
Or maybe I should formulate the question in singular - is it possible to remove a file from all of the commits where it features, since the first commit where it was added? (if it is possible for one file, then I can just repeat the process for any additional file I'd like to remove)
Yes this is possible.
However, this is a more advanced use of mercurial and will require you enabling at lease one extension.
As a new user, my recommendations would be to simply use mercurial basic management and remove the file(s) of concern:
hg remove <file>
You can then commit the change.
While this will not remove the file(s) from all changesets, it will remove it
going forward. This honestly is the recommended way of managing working content.
It should be noted that this is likely your only option if you have pushed changes to the parent repository. If you have pushed your changes to the parent repository, you will also have to edit it which makes things much more complicated and the potential for a serious mistake more likely.
If you truly want to remove it from previous changesets, you will need enable the histedit extension (included with mercurial).
[extensions]
histedit =
Since you are a relatively new user to mercurial, I strongly recommend that you backup your repository and experiment there before attempting this on you working copy.
The process I recommend for this is as follows:
Note: this only works as described for changesets that have not been pushed and have phase = draft (or secret)
1) Identify all changes where file(s) are added or modified
You will need to know each changeset where the file(s) where modified or added. You will need to modify each of these changesets in the reverse order that they where added.
You can use:
hg log file
to list changesets where the file was modified or added.
2) Slowly edit each affected changeset (working your way backwards)
Use the histedit to display all show all changesets that can be modified/edited in your default editor.
hg histedit
Find the first changeset you identified and change it from pick to edit and save the change.
This will drop you into histedit edit mode. This is the state just before the changeset was committed. This means you can make changes such as modifying, unedifying. Adding or removing content. In this case we want to undo any changes to the file(s) in question.
hg revert file
or
hg remove file (if this is the changeset where the file as added)
3) recommit changeset
Once you have reversed the file changes/additions, you need to inform histedit
that you are done.
hg histedit --continue
This will cause the changeset to be recommitted with the modifications you made including editing the commit message.
Repeat this for each changeset until completed.
Note: While you can select multiple changes to edit in histedit, I recommend doing one at a time to help reduce complexity. Remember to do the in the reverse order that they where committed to help reduce / eliminate any merge conflicts.
Again a recommend practicing on a repository copy until you have the process firmly understood. Since you are modifying repository history, this can have potential negative effects of a mistake is made.
I highly recommend reading this: https://book.mercurial-scm.org/read/changing-history.html.
Related
Now my there's an extra few hundred lines of code in my project, scattered over half a dozen classes, and I'm not looking forward to tracking them down one by one.
No, but this is an avoidable problem
Instead of doing hg shelve, do hg commit --secret. This will create a "real" commit in the repository, which can be rebased or stripped (hg strip) when you no longer need it. It can also be folded into another changeset using hg histedit or hg fold (the latter requires the Evolve extension, which is experimental at the time of writing, while the former is interactive and may be hard to script).
The --secret flag ensures the changeset will not be accidentally pushed until you manually run hg phase -d REV on the changeset.
Yes, with a few steps. The help for unshelve specifies "If a shelved change is applied successfully, the bundle that contains the shelved changes is moved to a backup location (.hg/shelve-backup)." So hg update --clean will return you to the pre-unshelve state, unless you added changes in the mean-time, in which case you need to figure out how to recover the world prior to the unwanted patches. Then you can re-apply the patches stored in the backup individually if you wish to essentially re-do the unshelve under whatever conditions you prefer. In any event, the back-up contains the data you thought was missing.
I'm looking for a counter-part of git commit --amend in Mercurial, i.e. a way to modify the commit which my working copy is linked to. I'm only interested in the last commit, not an arbitrary earlier commit.
The requirements for this amend-procedure are:
if possible, it should not require any extensions. It must not require non-default extensions, i.e. extensions which do not come with an official Mercurial installation.
if the commit to amend is one head of my current branch, no new head should be created. If the commit is not head, a new head may be created.
the procedure should be safe in a way that if for whatever reasons the amending fails, I want to have the same working copy and repository state restored as before the amending. With other words, if the amending itself can fail, there should be a fail-safe procedure to restore the working copy and repository state. I'm referring to "failures" which lie in the nature of the amend-procedure (like e.g. conflicts), not to file-system-related problems (like access restrictions, not being able to lock a file for writing, ...)
Update (1):
the procedure must be automatable, so it can be performed by a GUI client without any user interaction required.
Update (2):
files in the working directory must not be touched (there may be file system locks on certain modified files). This especially means, that a possible approach may at no point require a clean working directory.
With the release of Mercurial 2.2, you can use the --amend option with hg commit to update the last commit with the current working directory
From the command line reference:
The --amend flag can be used to amend the parent of the working directory with a new commit that contains the changes in the parent in addition to those currently reported by hg status, if there are any. The old commit is stored in a backup bundle in .hg/strip-backup (see hg help bundle and hg help unbundle on how to restore it).
Message, user and date are taken from the amended commit unless specified. When a message isn't specified on the command line, the editor will open with the message of the amended commit.
The great thing is that this mechanism is "safe", because it relies on the relatively new "Phases" feature to prevent updates that would change history that's already been made available outside of the local repository.
You have 3 options to edit commits in Mercurial:
hg strip --keep --rev -1 undo the last (1) commit(s), so you can do it again (see this answer for more information).
Using the MQ extension, which is shipped with Mercurial
Even if it isn't shipped with Mercurial, the Histedit extension is worth mentioning
You can also have a look on the Editing History page of the Mercurial wiki.
In short, editing history is really hard and discouraged. And if you've already pushed your changes, there's barely nothing you can do, except if you have total control of all the other clones.
I'm not really familiar with the git commit --amend command, but AFAIK, Histedit is what seems to be the closest approach, but sadly it isn't shipped with Mercurial. MQ is really complicated to use, but you can do nearly anything with it.
GUI equivalent for hg commit --amend:
This also works from TortoiseHG's GUI (I'm using v2.5):
Swich to the 'Commit' view or, in the workbench view, select the 'working directory' entry.
The 'Commit' button has an option named 'Amend current revision' (click the button's drop-down arrow to find it).
||
||
\/
Caveat emptor:
This extra option will only be enabled if the mercurial version is at least
2.2.0, and if the current revision is not public, is not a patch and has no
children. [...]
Clicking the button will call
'commit --amend' to 'amend' the revision.
More info about this on the THG dev channel
I'm tuning into what krtek has written. More specifically solution 1:
Assumptions:
you've committed one (!) changeset but have not pushed it yet
you want to modify this changeset (e.g. add, remove or change files and/or the commit message)
Solution:
use hg rollback to undo the last commit
commit again with the new changes in place
The rollback really undoes the last operation. Its way of working is quite simple: normal operations in HG will only append to files; this includes a commit. Mercurial keeps track of the file lengths of the last transaction and can therefore completely undo one step by truncating the files back to their old lengths.
Assuming that you have not yet propagated your changes, here is what you can do.
Add to your .hgrc:
[extensions]
mq =
In your repository:
hg qimport -r0:tip
hg qpop -a
Of course you need not start with revision zero or pop all patches, for the last just one pop (hg qpop) suffices (see below).
remove the last entry in the .hg/patches/series file, or the patches you do not like. Reordering is possible too.
hg qpush -a; hg qfinish -a
remove the .diff files (unapplied patches) still in .hg/patches (should be one in your case).
If you don't want to take back all of your patch, you can edit it by using hg qimport -r0:tip (or similar), then edit stuff and use hg qrefresh to merge the changes into the topmost patch on your stack. Read hg help qrefresh.
By editing .hg/patches/series, you can even remove several patches, or reorder some. If your last revision is 99, you may just use hg qimport -r98:tip; hg qpop; [edit series file]; hg qpush -a; hg qfinish -a.
Of course, this procedure is highly discouraged and risky. Make a backup of everything before you do this!
As a sidenote, I've done it zillions of times on private-only repositories.
Recent versions of Mercurial include the evolve extension which provides the hg amend command. This allows amending a commit without losing the pre-amend history in your version control.
hg amend [OPTION]... [FILE]...
aliases: refresh
combine a changeset with updates and replace it with a new one
Commits a new changeset incorporating both the changes to the given files
and all the changes from the current parent changeset into the repository.
See 'hg commit' for details about committing changes.
If you don't specify -m, the parent's message will be reused.
Behind the scenes, Mercurial first commits the update as a regular child
of the current parent. Then it creates a new commit on the parent's
parents with the updated contents. Then it changes the working copy parent
to this new combined changeset. Finally, the old changeset and its update
are hidden from 'hg log' (unless you use --hidden with log).
See https://www.mercurial-scm.org/doc/evolution/user-guide.html#example-3-amend-a-changeset-with-evolve for a complete description of the evolve extension.
Might not solve all the problems in the original question, but since this seems to be the de facto post on how mercurial can amend to previous commit, I'll add my 2 cents worth of information.
If you are like me, and only wish to modify the previous commit message (fix a typo etc) without adding any files, this will work
hg commit -X 'glob:**' --amend
Without any include or exclude patterns hg commit will by default include all files in working directory. Applying pattern -X 'glob:**' will exclude all possible files, allowing only to modify the commit message.
Functionally it is same as git commit --amend when there are no files in index/stage.
Another solution could be use the uncommit command to exclude specific file from current commit.
hg uncommit [file/directory]
This is very helpful when you want to keep current commit and deselect some files from commit (especially helpful for files/directories have been deleted).
If I do 'hg status' and see the following:
R flash/AC_OETags.js
it seems to mean that there is no file there, but there has been one at some point that has been removed.
How do I 'commit' this change so it stops showing up when I do 'hg status'?
==UPDATE==
The answer seems to be to commit the file. Actually, there are ~100 files with status R because I removed an entire directory tree. Anyone know how to commit all files in a directory tree in one go?
I don't want to do just hg commit, because there are other changes too.
The “R” means “Removed” so the next time we commit in Mercurial this file will be removed. (The history of the file will remain in the repository, so of course we can always get it back).
therefore run your hg commit command and all will be well
Thanks to hginit.com for that titbit - its my Mercurial bible
You can commit just that file:
hg commit flash/AC_OETags.js
however having "masses of other uncommitted files" is terrible process. You need to come up with a workflow that lets you commit frequently.
You can use the repository explorer from TortoiseHg to easily manage the files you want to include in a commit.
Also, removing a directory probably warrants a changeset in itself. You should get into the habit of committing more often (one concept, one commit... and it's local anyway). Furthermore, as long as you haven't pushed your changes to anyone (or anyone pulled from you) you could still use hg rebase --collapse to regroup some changesets if you think you have separated too much (this is a more advanced feature that I suggest you try on a test repository first as you could break things if you're not careful)
We've just recently switched over from SVN to Mercurial, but now we are running into problems with our workflow. Example:
I have my local clone of the repository which I work on. I'm making some highly experimental changes to our code base, something that I don't want to commit before I'm sure it works the way it is supposed to, I don't want to commit it even locally. Now, simultaneously, my co-worker has made some significant improvements/bug fixes which I need. He pushes his commits to our main repository. The question is, how can I merge his changes to my workspace without the requirement that I have to commit all my changes, since I need his changes to test my own code?
A more day-to-day problem we have with the exact same workflow is where we have a couple of configuration files which are in the repository. Each developer makes a couple of small environment specific changes to the configuration files, but do not commit the changes. These couple of uncommitted files hinders us from making any merges to our workspace, just like with the example above. Ideally, the configuration files probably shouldn't be in the repository, unfortunately, that's just how it has to be for here unnamed reasons.
If you don't want to clone, you can do it the following way.
hg diff > mylocalchanges.txt
hg revert -a
# Do your merge here, once you are done, import back your local mods
hg import --no-commit mylocalchanges.txt
There are two operations, as you've discovered, that makes changes from one person available to someone else (or many, on either side.)
There's pulling, which takes changes from some other clone of the repository and puts them into your clone.
There's pushing, which takes changes from your repository and puts them into another clone.
In your case, your coworker has pushed his changes into what I assume is your central master of the repository.
After he has done this, you can pull the latest changes down into your repository, and merge them into your branch. This will incorporate any bugfixes or changes your coworker did into your experimental code.
This gives you the freedom of staying current on other coworkers development in your project, and not having to release your experimental code until it is ready (or even at all.)
So, as long as you stay away from the Push command, you're safe.
Of course, this also assumes nobody is pulling directly from your clone of the repository, if they do that, then of course they will get your experimental changes, but it doesn't sound like you've set it up this way (and it is highly unlikely as well.)
As for the configuration files, the typical way to do this is that you only commit a master file template into the repository, with a different name (ie. an extra extension .template or similar), and then place the name of the real configuration file into the ignore filter.
Each developer then has to make his or her own copy of the template, rename it, and change it in any way they want, without the risk of committing database connection strings, passwords, or local paths, to the repository.
If necessary, provide a script that will help the developer make the real configuration file if it is long and complex.
Regarding your experimental changes, you should commit them. Often.
Simply you commit them in a clone you don't push. You only pull to merge whatever updates you need from other repos.
As for config files, don't commit them.
Commit template files, and script able to generate complete config files from the template.
That way, developers will only modify "private" (i.e. not committed) config files with their own private values.
If you know your uncommitted changes will not collide with the merge commit that you are creating - then you can do the following...
1) Shelve the uncommitted changes
2) Do the pull and merge
3) Unshelve the uncommitted changes
Shelf effectively stores your uncommitted changes away as into diff (relative to your last commit) then rolls back those files in your local workspace. Then un-shelving then applies that diff, bringing back your uncommitted changes.
Tools such as TortoiseHg have shelf built in.
I have a local mercurial repository with some site-specific changes in it. What I would like to do is set a couple files to be un-commitable so that they aren't automatically committed when I do an hg commit with no arguments.
Right now, I'm doing complicated things with mq and guards to achieve this, pushing and popping and selecting guards to prevent my changes (which are checked into an mq patch) from getting committed.
Is there an easier way to do this? I'm sick of reading the help for all the mq commands every time I want to commit a change that doesn't include my site-specific changes.
I would put those files in .hgignore and commit a "sample" form of those files so that they could be easily recreated for a new site when someone checks out your code.
I know that bazaar has shelve and unshelve commands to push and pop changes you don't want included in a commit. I think it's pretty likely that Mercurial has similar commands.
I'm curious why you can't have another repo checked out with those specific changes, and then transplant/pull/patch to it when you need to update stuff. Then you'd be primarily working from the original repo, and it's not like you'd be wasting space since hg uses links. I commonly have two+ versions checked out so I can work on a number of updates then merge them together.