git-commit-vandalism/t/t3509-cherry-pick-merge-df.sh

105 lines
2.4 KiB
Bash
Raw Normal View History

#!/bin/sh
test_description='Test cherry-pick with directory/file conflicts'
GIT_TEST_DEFAULT_INITIAL_BRANCH_NAME=main
tests: mark tests relying on the current default for `init.defaultBranch` In addition to the manual adjustment to let the `linux-gcc` CI job run the test suite with `master` and then with `main`, this patch makes sure that GIT_TEST_DEFAULT_INITIAL_BRANCH_NAME is set in all test scripts that currently rely on the initial branch name being `master by default. To determine which test scripts to mark up, the first step was to force-set the default branch name to `master` in - all test scripts that contain the keyword `master`, - t4211, which expects `t/t4211/history.export` with a hard-coded ref to initialize the default branch, - t5560 because it sources `t/t556x_common` which uses `master`, - t8002 and t8012 because both source `t/annotate-tests.sh` which also uses `master`) This trick was performed by this command: $ sed -i '/^ *\. \.\/\(test-lib\|lib-\(bash\|cvs\|git-svn\)\|gitweb-lib\)\.sh$/i\ GIT_TEST_DEFAULT_INITIAL_BRANCH_NAME=master\ export GIT_TEST_DEFAULT_INITIAL_BRANCH_NAME\ ' $(git grep -l master t/t[0-9]*.sh) \ t/t4211*.sh t/t5560*.sh t/t8002*.sh t/t8012*.sh After that, careful, manual inspection revealed that some of the test scripts containing the needle `master` do not actually rely on a specific default branch name: either they mention `master` only in a comment, or they initialize that branch specificially, or they do not actually refer to the current default branch. Therefore, the aforementioned modification was undone in those test scripts thusly: $ git checkout HEAD -- \ t/t0027-auto-crlf.sh t/t0060-path-utils.sh \ t/t1011-read-tree-sparse-checkout.sh \ t/t1305-config-include.sh t/t1309-early-config.sh \ t/t1402-check-ref-format.sh t/t1450-fsck.sh \ t/t2024-checkout-dwim.sh \ t/t2106-update-index-assume-unchanged.sh \ t/t3040-subprojects-basic.sh t/t3301-notes.sh \ t/t3308-notes-merge.sh t/t3423-rebase-reword.sh \ t/t3436-rebase-more-options.sh \ t/t4015-diff-whitespace.sh t/t4257-am-interactive.sh \ t/t5323-pack-redundant.sh t/t5401-update-hooks.sh \ t/t5511-refspec.sh t/t5526-fetch-submodules.sh \ t/t5529-push-errors.sh t/t5530-upload-pack-error.sh \ t/t5548-push-porcelain.sh \ t/t5552-skipping-fetch-negotiator.sh \ t/t5572-pull-submodule.sh t/t5608-clone-2gb.sh \ t/t5614-clone-submodules-shallow.sh \ t/t7508-status.sh t/t7606-merge-custom.sh \ t/t9302-fast-import-unpack-limit.sh We excluded one set of test scripts in these commands, though: the range of `git p4` tests. The reason? `git p4` stores the (foreign) remote branch in the branch called `p4/master`, which is obviously not the default branch. Manual analysis revealed that only five of these tests actually require a specific default branch name to pass; They were modified thusly: $ sed -i '/^ *\. \.\/lib-git-p4\.sh$/i\ GIT_TEST_DEFAULT_INITIAL_BRANCH_NAME=master\ export GIT_TEST_DEFAULT_INITIAL_BRANCH_NAME\ ' t/t980[0167]*.sh t/t9811*.sh Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2020-11-19 00:44:19 +01:00
export GIT_TEST_DEFAULT_INITIAL_BRANCH_NAME
. ./test-lib.sh
test_expect_success 'Initialize repository' '
mkdir a &&
>a/f &&
git add a &&
git commit -m a
'
test_expect_success 'Setup rename across paths each below D/F conflicts' '
mkdir b &&
test_ln_s_add ../a b/a &&
git commit -m b &&
git checkout -b branch &&
rm b/a &&
git mv a b/a &&
test_ln_s_add b/a a &&
git commit -m swap &&
>f1 &&
git add f1 &&
git commit -m f1
'
test_expect_success 'Cherry-pick succeeds with rename across D/F conflicts' '
git reset --hard &&
git checkout main^0 &&
git cherry-pick branch
'
test_expect_success 'Setup rename with file on one side matching directory name on other' '
git checkout --orphan nick-testcase &&
git rm -rf . &&
>empty &&
git add empty &&
git commit -m "Empty file" &&
git checkout -b simple &&
mv empty file &&
mkdir empty &&
mv file empty &&
git add empty/file &&
git commit -m "Empty file under empty dir" &&
echo content >newfile &&
git add newfile &&
git commit -m "New file"
'
test_expect_success 'Cherry-pick succeeds with was_a_dir/file -> was_a_dir (resolve)' '
git reset --hard &&
git checkout -q nick-testcase^0 &&
git cherry-pick --strategy=resolve simple
'
merge-recursive: D/F conflicts where was_a_dir/file -> was_a_dir In merge-recursive.c, whenever there was a rename where a file name on one side of the rename matches a directory name on the other side of the merge, then the very first check that string_list_has_string(&o->current_directory_set, ren1_dst) would trigger forcing it into marking it as a rename/directory conflict. However, if the path is only renamed on one side and a simple three-way merge between the separate files resolves cleanly, then we don't need to mark it as a rename/directory conflict. So, we can simply move the check for rename/directory conflicts after we've verified that there isn't a rename/rename conflict and that a threeway content merge doesn't work. This changes the particular error message one gets in the case where the directory name that a file on one side of the rename matches is not also part of the rename pair. For example, with commits containing the files: COMMON -> (HEAD, MERGE ) --------- --------------- ------- sub/file1 -> (sub/file1, newsub) <NULL> -> (newsub/newfile, <NULL>) then previously when one tried to merge MERGE into HEAD, one would get CONFLICT (rename/directory): Rename sub/file1->newsub in HEAD directory newsub added in merge Renaming sub/file1 to newsub~HEAD instead Adding newsub/newfile Automatic merge failed; fix conflicts and then commit the result. After this patch, the error message will instead become: Removing newsub Adding newsub/newfile CONFLICT (file/directory): There is a directory with name newsub in merge. Adding newsub as newsub~HEAD Automatic merge failed; fix conflicts and then commit the result. That makes more sense to me, because git can't know that there's a conflict until after it's tried resolving paths involving newsub/newfile to see if they are still in the way at the end (and if newsub/newfile is not in the way at the end, there should be no conflict at all, which did not hold with git previously). Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2010-09-08 08:40:41 +02:00
test_expect_success 'Cherry-pick succeeds with was_a_dir/file -> was_a_dir (recursive)' '
git reset --hard &&
git checkout -q nick-testcase^0 &&
git cherry-pick --strategy=recursive simple
'
test_expect_success 'Setup rename with file on one side matching different dirname on other' '
git reset --hard &&
git checkout --orphan mergeme &&
git rm -rf . &&
mkdir sub &&
mkdir othersub &&
echo content > sub/file &&
echo foo > othersub/whatever &&
git add -A &&
git commit -m "Common commit" &&
git rm -rf othersub &&
git mv sub/file othersub &&
git commit -m "Commit to merge" &&
git checkout -b newhead mergeme~1 &&
>independent-change &&
git add independent-change &&
git commit -m "Completely unrelated change"
'
test_expect_success 'Cherry-pick with rename to different D/F conflict succeeds (resolve)' '
git reset --hard &&
git checkout -q newhead^0 &&
git cherry-pick --strategy=resolve mergeme
'
merge-recursive: D/F conflicts where was_a_dir/file -> was_a_dir In merge-recursive.c, whenever there was a rename where a file name on one side of the rename matches a directory name on the other side of the merge, then the very first check that string_list_has_string(&o->current_directory_set, ren1_dst) would trigger forcing it into marking it as a rename/directory conflict. However, if the path is only renamed on one side and a simple three-way merge between the separate files resolves cleanly, then we don't need to mark it as a rename/directory conflict. So, we can simply move the check for rename/directory conflicts after we've verified that there isn't a rename/rename conflict and that a threeway content merge doesn't work. This changes the particular error message one gets in the case where the directory name that a file on one side of the rename matches is not also part of the rename pair. For example, with commits containing the files: COMMON -> (HEAD, MERGE ) --------- --------------- ------- sub/file1 -> (sub/file1, newsub) <NULL> -> (newsub/newfile, <NULL>) then previously when one tried to merge MERGE into HEAD, one would get CONFLICT (rename/directory): Rename sub/file1->newsub in HEAD directory newsub added in merge Renaming sub/file1 to newsub~HEAD instead Adding newsub/newfile Automatic merge failed; fix conflicts and then commit the result. After this patch, the error message will instead become: Removing newsub Adding newsub/newfile CONFLICT (file/directory): There is a directory with name newsub in merge. Adding newsub as newsub~HEAD Automatic merge failed; fix conflicts and then commit the result. That makes more sense to me, because git can't know that there's a conflict until after it's tried resolving paths involving newsub/newfile to see if they are still in the way at the end (and if newsub/newfile is not in the way at the end, there should be no conflict at all, which did not hold with git previously). Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2010-09-08 08:40:41 +02:00
test_expect_success 'Cherry-pick with rename to different D/F conflict succeeds (recursive)' '
git reset --hard &&
git checkout -q newhead^0 &&
git cherry-pick --strategy=recursive mergeme
'
test_done