Merge branch 'ta/user-manual'

Update the user's manual to more recent versions of Git.

* ta/user-manual:
  "git prune" is safe
  Remove irrelevant reference from "Tying it all together"
  Remove unnecessary historical note from "Object storage format"
  Improve section "Merging multiple trees"
  Improve section "Manipulating branches"
  Simplify "How to make a commit"
  Fix some typos and improve wording
  Use "git merge" instead of "git pull ."
  Use current output for "git repack"
  Use current "detached HEAD" message
  Call it "Git User Manual" and remove reference to very old Git version

1 files changed, 63 insertions, 79 deletions

diff --git a/Documentation/user-manual.txt b/Documentation/user-manual.txt
index fe723e4..29552e7 100644
--- a/Documentation/user-manual.txt
+++ b/Documentation/user-manual.txt
@@ -1,6 +1,5 @@
-Git User's Manual (for version 1.5.3 or newer)
-______________________________________________
-
+Git User Manual
+_______________
 
 Git is a fast distributed revision control system.
 
@@ -220,7 +219,7 @@ of development leading to that point.
 
 The best way to see how this works is using the linkgit:gitk[1]
 command; running gitk now on a Git repository and looking for merge
-commits will help understand how the Git organizes history.
+commits will help understand how Git organizes history.
 
 In the following, we say that commit X is "reachable" from commit Y
 if commit X is an ancestor of commit Y.  Equivalently, you could say
@@ -269,27 +268,23 @@ Creating, deleting, and modifying branches is quick and easy; here's
 a summary of the commands:
 
 `git branch`::
-	list all branches
+	list all branches.
 `git branch <branch>`::
 	create a new branch named `<branch>`, referencing the same
-	point in history as the current branch
+	point in history as the current branch.
 `git branch <branch> <start-point>`::
 	create a new branch named `<branch>`, referencing
 	`<start-point>`, which may be specified any way you like,
-	including using a branch name or a tag name
+	including using a branch name or a tag name.
 `git branch -d <branch>`::
-	delete the branch `<branch>`; if the branch you are deleting
-	points to a commit which is not reachable from the current
-	branch, this command will fail with a warning.
+	delete the branch `<branch>`; if the branch is not fully
+	merged in its upstream branch or contained in the current branch,
+	this command will fail with a warning.
 `git branch -D <branch>`::
-	even if the branch points to a commit not reachable
-	from the current branch, you may know that that commit
-	is still reachable from some other branch or tag.  In that
-	case it is safe to use this command to force Git to delete
-	the branch.
+	delete the branch `<branch>` irrespective of its merged status.
 `git checkout <branch>`::
 	make the current branch `<branch>`, updating the working
-	directory to reflect the version referenced by `<branch>`
+	directory to reflect the version referenced by `<branch>`.
 `git checkout -b <new> <start-point>`::
 	create a new branch `<new>` referencing `<start-point>`, and
 	check it out.
@@ -313,10 +308,17 @@ referenced by a tag:
 
 ------------------------------------------------
 $ git checkout v2.6.17
-Note: moving to "v2.6.17" which isn't a local branch
-If you want to create a new branch from this checkout, you may do so
-(now or later) by using -b with the checkout command again. Example:
-  git checkout -b <new_branch_name>
+Note: checking out 'v2.6.17'.
+
+You are in 'detached HEAD' state. You can look around, make experimental
+changes and commit them, and you can discard any commits you make in this
+state without impacting any branches by performing another checkout.
+
+If you want to create a new branch to retain commits you create, you may
+do so (now or later) by using -b with the checkout command again. Example:
+
+  git checkout -b new_branch_name
+
 HEAD is now at 427abfa... Linux v2.6.17
 ------------------------------------------------
 
@@ -327,7 +329,7 @@ and git branch shows that you are no longer on a branch:
 $ cat .git/HEAD
 427abfa28afedffadfca9dd8b067eb6d36bac53f
 $ git branch
-* (no branch)
+* (detached from v2.6.17)
   master
 ------------------------------------------------
 
@@ -787,7 +789,7 @@ e05db0fd4f31dde7005f075a84f96b360d05984b
 -------------------------------------------------
 
 Or you could recall that the `...` operator selects all commits
-contained reachable from either one reference or the other but not
+reachable from either one reference or the other but not
 both; so
 
 -------------------------------------------------
@@ -814,7 +816,7 @@ You could just visually inspect the commits since e05db0fd:
 $ gitk e05db0fd..
 -------------------------------------------------
 
-Or you can use linkgit:git-name-rev[1], which will give the commit a
+or you can use linkgit:git-name-rev[1], which will give the commit a
 name based on any tag it finds pointing to one of the commit's
 descendants:
 
@@ -858,8 +860,8 @@ because it outputs only commits that are not reachable from v1.5.0-rc1.
 
 As yet another alternative, the linkgit:git-show-branch[1] command lists
 the commits reachable from its arguments with a display on the left-hand
-side that indicates which arguments that commit is reachable from.  So,
-you can run something like
+side that indicates which arguments that commit is reachable from.
+So, if you run something like
 
 -------------------------------------------------
 $ git show-branch e05db0fd v1.5.0-rc0 v1.5.0-rc1 v1.5.0-rc2
@@ -871,15 +873,15 @@ available
 ...
 -------------------------------------------------
 
-then search for a line that looks like
+then a line like
 
 -------------------------------------------------
 + ++ [e05db0fd] Fix warnings in sha1_file.c - use C99 printf format if
 available
 -------------------------------------------------
 
-Which shows that e05db0fd is reachable from itself, from v1.5.0-rc1, and
-from v1.5.0-rc2, but not from v1.5.0-rc0.
+shows that e05db0fd is reachable from itself, from v1.5.0-rc1,
+and from v1.5.0-rc2, and not from v1.5.0-rc0.
 
 [[showing-commits-unique-to-a-branch]]
 Showing commits unique to a given branch
@@ -1074,19 +1076,13 @@ produce no output at that point.
 
 Modifying the index is easy:
 
-To update the index with the new contents of a modified file, use
-
--------------------------------------------------
-$ git add path/to/file
--------------------------------------------------
-
-To add the contents of a new file to the index, use
+To update the index with the contents of a new or modified file, use
 
 -------------------------------------------------
 $ git add path/to/file
 -------------------------------------------------
 
-To remove a file from the index and from the working tree,
+To remove a file from the index and from the working tree, use
 
 -------------------------------------------------
 $ git rm path/to/file
@@ -1787,7 +1783,7 @@ $ git pull . branch
 $ git merge branch
 -------------------------------------------------
 
-are roughly equivalent.  The former is actually very commonly used.
+are roughly equivalent.
 
 [[submitting-patches]]
 Submitting patches to a project
@@ -2249,11 +2245,11 @@ commit to this branch.
 $ ... patch ... test  ... commit [ ... patch ... test ... commit ]*
 -------------------------------------------------
 
-When you are happy with the state of this change, you can pull it into the
+When you are happy with the state of this change, you can merge it into the
 "test" branch in preparation to make it public:
 
 -------------------------------------------------
-$ git checkout test && git pull . speed-up-spinlocks
+$ git checkout test && git merge speed-up-spinlocks
 -------------------------------------------------
 
 It is unlikely that you would have any conflicts here ... but you might if you
@@ -2265,7 +2261,7 @@ see the value of keeping each patch (or patch series) in its own branch.  It
 means that the patches can be moved into the `release` tree in any order.
 
 -------------------------------------------------
-$ git checkout release && git pull . speed-up-spinlocks
+$ git checkout release && git merge speed-up-spinlocks
 -------------------------------------------------
 
 After a while, you will have a number of branches, and despite the
@@ -3197,17 +3193,15 @@ To put the loose objects into a pack, just run git repack:
 
 ------------------------------------------------
 $ git repack
-Generating pack...
-Done counting 6020 objects.
-Deltifying 6020 objects.
- 100% (6020/6020) done
-Writing 6020 objects.
- 100% (6020/6020) done
-Total 6020, written 6020 (delta 4070), reused 0 (delta 0)
-Pack pack-3e54ad29d5b2e05838c75df582c65257b8d08e1c created.
+Counting objects: 6020, done.
+Delta compression using up to 4 threads.
+Compressing objects: 100% (6020/6020), done.
+Writing objects: 100% (6020/6020), done.
+Total 6020 (delta 4070), reused 0 (delta 0)
 ------------------------------------------------
 
-You can then run
+This creates a single "pack file" in .git/objects/pack/
+containing all currently unpacked objects.  You can then run
 
 ------------------------------------------------
 $ git prune
@@ -3305,17 +3299,11 @@ state, you can just prune all unreachable objects:
 $ git prune
 ------------------------------------------------
 
-and they'll be gone. But you should only run `git prune` on a quiescent
+and they'll be gone. (You should only run `git prune` on a quiescent
 repository--it's kind of like doing a filesystem fsck recovery: you
 don't want to do that while the filesystem is mounted.
-
-(The same is true of `git fsck` itself, btw, but since
-`git fsck` never actually *changes* the repository, it just reports
-on what it found, `git fsck` itself is never 'dangerous' to run.
-Running it while somebody is actually changing the repository can cause
-confusing and scary messages, but it won't actually do anything bad. In
-contrast, running `git prune` while somebody is actively changing the
-repository is a *BAD* idea).
+`git prune` is designed not to cause any harm in such cases of concurrent
+accesses to a repository but you might receive confusing or scary messages.)
 
 [[recovering-from-repository-corruption]]
 Recovering from repository corruption
@@ -3538,7 +3526,7 @@ with Git 1.5.2 can look up the submodule commits in the repository and
 manually check them out; earlier versions won't recognize the submodules at
 all.
 
-To see how submodule support works, create (for example) four example
+To see how submodule support works, create four example
 repositories that can be used later as a submodule:
 
 -------------------------------------------------
@@ -3640,7 +3628,7 @@ working on a branch.
 
 -------------------------------------------------
 $ git branch
-* (no branch)
+* (detached from d266b98)
   master
 -------------------------------------------------
 
@@ -3910,7 +3898,7 @@ 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",
+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
@@ -3930,8 +3918,7 @@ save the note about that state, in practice we tend to just write the
 result to the file pointed at by `.git/HEAD`, so that we can always see
 what the last committed state was.
 
-Here is an ASCII art by Jon Loeliger that illustrates how
-various pieces fit together.
+Here is a picture that illustrates how various pieces fit together:
 
 ------------
 
@@ -4010,27 +3997,26 @@ to see what the top commit was.
 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 can help you perform a three-way merge, which can in turn be
+used for a many-way merge by repeating the merge procedure several
+times.  The usual situation is that you only do one three-way merge
+(reconciling two lines of history) and commit the result, but if
+you like to, you can merge several branches 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 perform a three-way merge, you start with the two commits you
+want to merge, find their closest common parent (a third commit),
+and compare the trees corresponding to these three commits.
 
-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, look up the common parent of two
+commits:
 
 -------------------------------------------------
 $ git 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)
+This prints the name of a commit they are both based on. You should
+now look up the tree objects of those commits, which you can easily
+do with
 
 -------------------------------------------------
 $ git cat-file commit <commitname> | head -1
@@ -4152,8 +4138,6 @@ about the data in the object.  It's worth noting that the SHA-1 hash
 that is used to name the object is the hash of the original data
 plus this header, so `sha1sum` 'file' does not match the object name
 for 'file'.
-(Historical note: in the dawn of the age of Git the hash
-was the SHA-1 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