Ensure index matches head before invoking merge machinery, round N
This is the bug that just won't die; there always seems to be another
form of it somewhere. See the commit message of 55f39cf7551b ("merge:
fix misleading pre-merge check documentation", 2018-06-30) for a more
detailed explanation), but in short:
<quick summary>
builtin/merge.c contains this important requirement for merge
strategies:
...the index must be in sync with the head commit. The strategies are
responsible to ensure this.
This condition is important to enforce because there are two likely
failure cases when the index isn't in sync with the head commit:
* we silently throw away changes the user had staged before the merge
* we accidentally (and silently) include changes in the merge that
were not part of either of the branches/trees being merged
Discarding users' work and mis-merging are both bad outcomes, especially
when done silently, so naturally this rule was stated sternly -- but,
unfortunately totally ignored in practice unless and until actual bugs
were found. But, fear not: the bugs from this were fixed in commit
ee6566e8d70d ("[PATCH] Rewrite read-tree", 2005-09-05)
through a rewrite of read-tree (again, commit 55f39cf7551b has a more
detailed explanation of how this affected merge). And it was fixed
again in commit
160252f81626 ("git-merge-ours: make sure our index matches HEAD", 2005-11-03)
...and it was fixed again in commit
3ec62ad9ffba ("merge-octopus: abort if index does not match HEAD", 2016-04-09)
...and again in commit
65170c07d466 ("merge-recursive: avoid incorporating uncommitted changes in a merge", 2017-12-21)
...and again in commit
eddd1a411d93 ("merge-recursive: enforce rule that index matches head before merging", 2018-06-30)
...with multiple testcases added to the testsuite that could be
enumerated in even more commits.
Then, finally, in a patch in the same series as the last fix above, the
documentation about this requirement was fixed in commit 55f39cf7551b
("merge: fix misleading pre-merge check documentation", 2018-06-30), and
we all lived happily ever after...
</quick summary>
Unfortunately, "ever after" apparently denotes a limited time and it
expired today. The merge-recursive rule to enforce that index matches
head was at the beginning of merge_trees() and would only trigger when
opt->call_depth was 0. Since merge_recursive() doesn't call
merge_trees() until after returning from recursing, this meant that the
check wasn't triggered by merge_recursive() until it had first finished
all the intermediate merges to create virtual merge bases. That is a
potentially HUGE amount of computation (and writing of intermediate
merge results into the .git/objects directory) before it errors out and
says, in effect, "Sorry, I can't do any merging because you have some
local changes that would be overwritten."
Trying to enforce that all of merge_trees(), merge_recursive(), and
merge_recursive_generic() checked the index == head condition earlier
resulted in a bunch of broken tests. It turns out that
merge_recursive() has code to drop and reload the cache while recursing
to create intermediate virtual merge bases, but unfortunately that code
runs even when no recursion is necessary. This unconditional dropping
and reloading of the cache masked a few bugs:
* builtin/merge-recursive.c: didn't even bother loading the index.
* builtin/stash.c: feels like a fake 'builtin' because it repeatedly
invokes git subprocesses all over the place, mixed with other
operations. In particular, invoking "git reset" will reset the
index on disk, but the parent process that invoked it won't
automatically have its in-memory index updated.
* t3030-merge-recursive.h: this test has always been broken in that it
didn't make sure to make index match head before running. But, it
didn't care about the index or even the merge result, just the
verbose output while running. While commit eddd1a411d93
("merge-recursive: enforce rule that index matches head before
merging", 2018-06-30) should have uncovered this broken test, it
used a test_must_fail wrapper around the merge-recursive call
because it was known that the merge resulted in a rename/rename
conflict. Thus, that fix only made this test fail for a different
reason, and since the index == head check didn't happen until after
coming all the way back out of the recursion, the testcase had
enough information to pass the one check that it did perform.
So, load the index in builtin/merge-recursive.c, reload the in-memory
index in builtin/stash.c, and modify the t3030 testcase to correctly
setup the index and make sure that the test fails in the expected way
(meaning it reports a rename/rename conflict). This makes sure that
all callers actually make the index match head. The next commit will
then enforce the condition that index matches head earlier so this
problem doesn't return in the future.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2019-08-17 20:41:28 +02:00
|
|
|
#include "cache.h"
|
Fix sparse warnings
Fix warnings from 'make check'.
- These files don't include 'builtin.h' causing sparse to complain that
cmd_* isn't declared:
builtin/clone.c:364, builtin/fetch-pack.c:797,
builtin/fmt-merge-msg.c:34, builtin/hash-object.c:78,
builtin/merge-index.c:69, builtin/merge-recursive.c:22
builtin/merge-tree.c:341, builtin/mktag.c:156, builtin/notes.c:426
builtin/notes.c:822, builtin/pack-redundant.c:596,
builtin/pack-refs.c:10, builtin/patch-id.c:60, builtin/patch-id.c:149,
builtin/remote.c:1512, builtin/remote-ext.c:240,
builtin/remote-fd.c:53, builtin/reset.c:236, builtin/send-pack.c:384,
builtin/unpack-file.c:25, builtin/var.c:75
- These files have symbols which should be marked static since they're
only file scope:
submodule.c:12, diff.c:631, replace_object.c:92, submodule.c:13,
submodule.c:14, trace.c:78, transport.c:195, transport-helper.c:79,
unpack-trees.c:19, url.c:3, url.c:18, url.c:104, url.c:117, url.c:123,
url.c:129, url.c:136, thread-utils.c:21, thread-utils.c:48
- These files redeclare symbols to be different types:
builtin/index-pack.c:210, parse-options.c:564, parse-options.c:571,
usage.c:49, usage.c:58, usage.c:63, usage.c:72
- These files use a literal integer 0 when they really should use a NULL
pointer:
daemon.c:663, fast-import.c:2942, imap-send.c:1072, notes-merge.c:362
While we're in the area, clean up some unused #includes in builtin files
(mostly exec_cmd.h).
Signed-off-by: Stephen Boyd <bebarino@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2011-03-22 08:51:05 +01:00
|
|
|
#include "builtin.h"
|
Status update on merge-recursive in C
This is just an update for people being interested. Alex and me were
busy with that project for a few days now. While it has progressed nicely,
there are quite a couple TODOs in merge-recursive.c, just search for "TODO".
For impatient people: yes, it passes all the tests, and yes, according
to the evil test Alex did, it is faster than the Python script.
But no, it is not yet finished. Biggest points are:
- there are still three external calls
- in the end, it should not be necessary to write the index more than once
(just before exiting)
- a lot of things can be refactored to make the code easier and shorter
BTW we cannot just plug in git-merge-tree yet, because git-merge-tree
does not handle renames at all.
This patch is meant for testing, and as such,
- it compile the program to git-merge-recur
- it adjusts the scripts and tests to use git-merge-recur instead of
git-merge-recursive
- it provides "TEST", a script to execute the tests regarding -recursive
- it inlines the changes to read-cache.c (read_cache_from(), discard_cache()
and refresh_cache_entry())
Brought to you by Alex Riesen and Dscho
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-07-08 18:42:41 +02:00
|
|
|
#include "commit.h"
|
|
|
|
|
#include "tag.h"
|
2008-02-07 17:40:05 +01:00
|
|
|
#include "merge-recursive.h"
|
2010-08-26 07:50:45 +02:00
|
|
|
#include "xdiff-interface.h"
|
Status update on merge-recursive in C
This is just an update for people being interested. Alex and me were
busy with that project for a few days now. While it has progressed nicely,
there are quite a couple TODOs in merge-recursive.c, just search for "TODO".
For impatient people: yes, it passes all the tests, and yes, according
to the evil test Alex did, it is faster than the Python script.
But no, it is not yet finished. Biggest points are:
- there are still three external calls
- in the end, it should not be necessary to write the index more than once
(just before exiting)
- a lot of things can be refactored to make the code easier and shorter
BTW we cannot just plug in git-merge-tree yet, because git-merge-tree
does not handle renames at all.
This patch is meant for testing, and as such,
- it compile the program to git-merge-recur
- it adjusts the scripts and tests to use git-merge-recur instead of
git-merge-recursive
- it provides "TEST", a script to execute the tests regarding -recursive
- it inlines the changes to read-cache.c (read_cache_from(), discard_cache()
and refresh_cache_entry())
Brought to you by Alex Riesen and Dscho
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-07-08 18:42:41 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2010-08-30 05:30:22 +02:00
|
|
|
static const char builtin_merge_recursive_usage[] =
|
|
|
|
|
"git %s <base>... -- <head> <remote> ...";
|
|
|
|
|
|
2019-01-11 23:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
static char *better_branch_name(const char *branch)
|
2006-12-28 08:35:20 +01:00
|
|
|
{
|
2018-07-16 03:28:04 +02:00
|
|
|
static char githead_env[8 + GIT_MAX_HEXSZ + 1];
|
2006-12-28 08:35:20 +01:00
|
|
|
char *name;
|
|
|
|
|
|
2018-07-16 03:28:04 +02:00
|
|
|
if (strlen(branch) != the_hash_algo->hexsz)
|
2019-01-11 23:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
return xstrdup(branch);
|
2015-09-24 23:06:08 +02:00
|
|
|
xsnprintf(githead_env, sizeof(githead_env), "GITHEAD_%s", branch);
|
2006-12-28 08:35:20 +01:00
|
|
|
name = getenv(githead_env);
|
2019-01-11 23:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
return xstrdup(name ? name : branch);
|
2006-12-28 08:35:20 +01:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008-02-07 17:40:05 +01:00
|
|
|
int cmd_merge_recursive(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix)
|
Status update on merge-recursive in C
This is just an update for people being interested. Alex and me were
busy with that project for a few days now. While it has progressed nicely,
there are quite a couple TODOs in merge-recursive.c, just search for "TODO".
For impatient people: yes, it passes all the tests, and yes, according
to the evil test Alex did, it is faster than the Python script.
But no, it is not yet finished. Biggest points are:
- there are still three external calls
- in the end, it should not be necessary to write the index more than once
(just before exiting)
- a lot of things can be refactored to make the code easier and shorter
BTW we cannot just plug in git-merge-tree yet, because git-merge-tree
does not handle renames at all.
This patch is meant for testing, and as such,
- it compile the program to git-merge-recur
- it adjusts the scripts and tests to use git-merge-recur instead of
git-merge-recursive
- it provides "TEST", a script to execute the tests regarding -recursive
- it inlines the changes to read-cache.c (read_cache_from(), discard_cache()
and refresh_cache_entry())
Brought to you by Alex Riesen and Dscho
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-07-08 18:42:41 +02:00
|
|
|
{
|
2016-06-25 01:09:28 +02:00
|
|
|
const struct object_id *bases[21];
|
2008-08-12 22:13:59 +02:00
|
|
|
unsigned bases_count = 0;
|
|
|
|
|
int i, failed;
|
2016-06-25 01:09:28 +02:00
|
|
|
struct object_id h1, h2;
|
2008-08-25 16:25:57 +02:00
|
|
|
struct merge_options o;
|
2019-01-11 23:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
char *better1, *better2;
|
2008-08-25 16:25:57 +02:00
|
|
|
struct commit *result;
|
Status update on merge-recursive in C
This is just an update for people being interested. Alex and me were
busy with that project for a few days now. While it has progressed nicely,
there are quite a couple TODOs in merge-recursive.c, just search for "TODO".
For impatient people: yes, it passes all the tests, and yes, according
to the evil test Alex did, it is faster than the Python script.
But no, it is not yet finished. Biggest points are:
- there are still three external calls
- in the end, it should not be necessary to write the index more than once
(just before exiting)
- a lot of things can be refactored to make the code easier and shorter
BTW we cannot just plug in git-merge-tree yet, because git-merge-tree
does not handle renames at all.
This patch is meant for testing, and as such,
- it compile the program to git-merge-recur
- it adjusts the scripts and tests to use git-merge-recur instead of
git-merge-recursive
- it provides "TEST", a script to execute the tests regarding -recursive
- it inlines the changes to read-cache.c (read_cache_from(), discard_cache()
and refresh_cache_entry())
Brought to you by Alex Riesen and Dscho
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-07-08 18:42:41 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2019-01-12 03:13:29 +01:00
|
|
|
init_merge_options(&o, the_repository);
|
2013-11-30 21:55:40 +01:00
|
|
|
if (argv[0] && ends_with(argv[0], "-subtree"))
|
2008-07-01 07:18:57 +02:00
|
|
|
o.subtree_shift = "";
|
2007-02-16 01:32:45 +01:00
|
|
|
|
Status update on merge-recursive in C
This is just an update for people being interested. Alex and me were
busy with that project for a few days now. While it has progressed nicely,
there are quite a couple TODOs in merge-recursive.c, just search for "TODO".
For impatient people: yes, it passes all the tests, and yes, according
to the evil test Alex did, it is faster than the Python script.
But no, it is not yet finished. Biggest points are:
- there are still three external calls
- in the end, it should not be necessary to write the index more than once
(just before exiting)
- a lot of things can be refactored to make the code easier and shorter
BTW we cannot just plug in git-merge-tree yet, because git-merge-tree
does not handle renames at all.
This patch is meant for testing, and as such,
- it compile the program to git-merge-recur
- it adjusts the scripts and tests to use git-merge-recur instead of
git-merge-recursive
- it provides "TEST", a script to execute the tests regarding -recursive
- it inlines the changes to read-cache.c (read_cache_from(), discard_cache()
and refresh_cache_entry())
Brought to you by Alex Riesen and Dscho
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-07-08 18:42:41 +02:00
|
|
|
if (argc < 4)
|
2010-08-30 05:30:22 +02:00
|
|
|
usagef(builtin_merge_recursive_usage, argv[0]);
|
Status update on merge-recursive in C
This is just an update for people being interested. Alex and me were
busy with that project for a few days now. While it has progressed nicely,
there are quite a couple TODOs in merge-recursive.c, just search for "TODO".
For impatient people: yes, it passes all the tests, and yes, according
to the evil test Alex did, it is faster than the Python script.
But no, it is not yet finished. Biggest points are:
- there are still three external calls
- in the end, it should not be necessary to write the index more than once
(just before exiting)
- a lot of things can be refactored to make the code easier and shorter
BTW we cannot just plug in git-merge-tree yet, because git-merge-tree
does not handle renames at all.
This patch is meant for testing, and as such,
- it compile the program to git-merge-recur
- it adjusts the scripts and tests to use git-merge-recur instead of
git-merge-recursive
- it provides "TEST", a script to execute the tests regarding -recursive
- it inlines the changes to read-cache.c (read_cache_from(), discard_cache()
and refresh_cache_entry())
Brought to you by Alex Riesen and Dscho
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-07-08 18:42:41 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
for (i = 1; i < argc; ++i) {
|
2009-11-26 03:23:55 +01:00
|
|
|
const char *arg = argv[i];
|
|
|
|
|
|
2013-11-30 21:55:40 +01:00
|
|
|
if (starts_with(arg, "--")) {
|
2009-11-26 03:23:55 +01:00
|
|
|
if (!arg[2])
|
|
|
|
|
break;
|
2010-08-26 07:47:58 +02:00
|
|
|
if (parse_merge_opt(&o, arg + 2))
|
2016-09-15 16:59:01 +02:00
|
|
|
die(_("unknown option %s"), arg);
|
2009-11-26 03:23:55 +01:00
|
|
|
continue;
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
2008-08-25 16:25:57 +02:00
|
|
|
if (bases_count < ARRAY_SIZE(bases)-1) {
|
2016-06-25 01:09:28 +02:00
|
|
|
struct object_id *oid = xmalloc(sizeof(struct object_id));
|
|
|
|
|
if (get_oid(argv[i], oid))
|
2016-09-15 16:59:01 +02:00
|
|
|
die(_("could not parse object '%s'"), argv[i]);
|
2016-06-25 01:09:28 +02:00
|
|
|
bases[bases_count++] = oid;
|
2008-08-12 22:13:59 +02:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
else
|
2016-09-15 16:59:01 +02:00
|
|
|
warning(Q_("cannot handle more than %d base. "
|
|
|
|
|
"Ignoring %s.",
|
|
|
|
|
"cannot handle more than %d bases. "
|
|
|
|
|
"Ignoring %s.",
|
gettext API users: don't explicitly cast ngettext()'s "n"
Change a few stray users of the inline gettext.h Q_() function to stop
casting its "n" argument, the vast majority of the users of that
wrapper API use the implicit cast to "unsigned long".
The ngettext() function (which Q_() resolves to) takes an "unsigned
long int", and so does our Q_() wrapper for it, see 0c9ea33b90f (i18n:
add stub Q_() wrapper for ngettext, 2011-03-09). The function isn't
ours, but provided by e.g. GNU libintl.
This amends code added in added in 7171a0b0cf5 (index-pack: correct
"len" type in unpack_data(), 2016-07-13). The cast it added for the
printf format to die() was needed, but not the cast to Q_().
Likewise the casts in strbuf.c added in 8f354a1faed (l10n: localizable
upload progress messages, 2019-07-02) and for
builtin/merge-recursive.c in ccf7813139f (i18n: merge-recursive: mark
error messages for translation, 2016-09-15) weren't needed.
In the latter case the cast was copy/pasted from the argument to
warning() itself, added in b74d779bd90 (MinGW: Fix compiler warning in
merge-recursive, 2009-05-23). The cast for warning() is needed, but
not the one for ngettext()'s "n" argument.
Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2022-03-07 16:27:07 +01:00
|
|
|
ARRAY_SIZE(bases)-1),
|
2009-05-23 10:04:51 +02:00
|
|
|
(int)ARRAY_SIZE(bases)-1, argv[i]);
|
Status update on merge-recursive in C
This is just an update for people being interested. Alex and me were
busy with that project for a few days now. While it has progressed nicely,
there are quite a couple TODOs in merge-recursive.c, just search for "TODO".
For impatient people: yes, it passes all the tests, and yes, according
to the evil test Alex did, it is faster than the Python script.
But no, it is not yet finished. Biggest points are:
- there are still three external calls
- in the end, it should not be necessary to write the index more than once
(just before exiting)
- a lot of things can be refactored to make the code easier and shorter
BTW we cannot just plug in git-merge-tree yet, because git-merge-tree
does not handle renames at all.
This patch is meant for testing, and as such,
- it compile the program to git-merge-recur
- it adjusts the scripts and tests to use git-merge-recur instead of
git-merge-recursive
- it provides "TEST", a script to execute the tests regarding -recursive
- it inlines the changes to read-cache.c (read_cache_from(), discard_cache()
and refresh_cache_entry())
Brought to you by Alex Riesen and Dscho
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-07-08 18:42:41 +02:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
if (argc - i != 3) /* "--" "<head>" "<remote>" */
|
2016-09-15 16:59:01 +02:00
|
|
|
die(_("not handling anything other than two heads merge."));
|
Status update on merge-recursive in C
This is just an update for people being interested. Alex and me were
busy with that project for a few days now. While it has progressed nicely,
there are quite a couple TODOs in merge-recursive.c, just search for "TODO".
For impatient people: yes, it passes all the tests, and yes, according
to the evil test Alex did, it is faster than the Python script.
But no, it is not yet finished. Biggest points are:
- there are still three external calls
- in the end, it should not be necessary to write the index more than once
(just before exiting)
- a lot of things can be refactored to make the code easier and shorter
BTW we cannot just plug in git-merge-tree yet, because git-merge-tree
does not handle renames at all.
This patch is meant for testing, and as such,
- it compile the program to git-merge-recur
- it adjusts the scripts and tests to use git-merge-recur instead of
git-merge-recursive
- it provides "TEST", a script to execute the tests regarding -recursive
- it inlines the changes to read-cache.c (read_cache_from(), discard_cache()
and refresh_cache_entry())
Brought to you by Alex Riesen and Dscho
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-07-08 18:42:41 +02:00
|
|
|
|
Ensure index matches head before invoking merge machinery, round N
This is the bug that just won't die; there always seems to be another
form of it somewhere. See the commit message of 55f39cf7551b ("merge:
fix misleading pre-merge check documentation", 2018-06-30) for a more
detailed explanation), but in short:
<quick summary>
builtin/merge.c contains this important requirement for merge
strategies:
...the index must be in sync with the head commit. The strategies are
responsible to ensure this.
This condition is important to enforce because there are two likely
failure cases when the index isn't in sync with the head commit:
* we silently throw away changes the user had staged before the merge
* we accidentally (and silently) include changes in the merge that
were not part of either of the branches/trees being merged
Discarding users' work and mis-merging are both bad outcomes, especially
when done silently, so naturally this rule was stated sternly -- but,
unfortunately totally ignored in practice unless and until actual bugs
were found. But, fear not: the bugs from this were fixed in commit
ee6566e8d70d ("[PATCH] Rewrite read-tree", 2005-09-05)
through a rewrite of read-tree (again, commit 55f39cf7551b has a more
detailed explanation of how this affected merge). And it was fixed
again in commit
160252f81626 ("git-merge-ours: make sure our index matches HEAD", 2005-11-03)
...and it was fixed again in commit
3ec62ad9ffba ("merge-octopus: abort if index does not match HEAD", 2016-04-09)
...and again in commit
65170c07d466 ("merge-recursive: avoid incorporating uncommitted changes in a merge", 2017-12-21)
...and again in commit
eddd1a411d93 ("merge-recursive: enforce rule that index matches head before merging", 2018-06-30)
...with multiple testcases added to the testsuite that could be
enumerated in even more commits.
Then, finally, in a patch in the same series as the last fix above, the
documentation about this requirement was fixed in commit 55f39cf7551b
("merge: fix misleading pre-merge check documentation", 2018-06-30), and
we all lived happily ever after...
</quick summary>
Unfortunately, "ever after" apparently denotes a limited time and it
expired today. The merge-recursive rule to enforce that index matches
head was at the beginning of merge_trees() and would only trigger when
opt->call_depth was 0. Since merge_recursive() doesn't call
merge_trees() until after returning from recursing, this meant that the
check wasn't triggered by merge_recursive() until it had first finished
all the intermediate merges to create virtual merge bases. That is a
potentially HUGE amount of computation (and writing of intermediate
merge results into the .git/objects directory) before it errors out and
says, in effect, "Sorry, I can't do any merging because you have some
local changes that would be overwritten."
Trying to enforce that all of merge_trees(), merge_recursive(), and
merge_recursive_generic() checked the index == head condition earlier
resulted in a bunch of broken tests. It turns out that
merge_recursive() has code to drop and reload the cache while recursing
to create intermediate virtual merge bases, but unfortunately that code
runs even when no recursion is necessary. This unconditional dropping
and reloading of the cache masked a few bugs:
* builtin/merge-recursive.c: didn't even bother loading the index.
* builtin/stash.c: feels like a fake 'builtin' because it repeatedly
invokes git subprocesses all over the place, mixed with other
operations. In particular, invoking "git reset" will reset the
index on disk, but the parent process that invoked it won't
automatically have its in-memory index updated.
* t3030-merge-recursive.h: this test has always been broken in that it
didn't make sure to make index match head before running. But, it
didn't care about the index or even the merge result, just the
verbose output while running. While commit eddd1a411d93
("merge-recursive: enforce rule that index matches head before
merging", 2018-06-30) should have uncovered this broken test, it
used a test_must_fail wrapper around the merge-recursive call
because it was known that the merge resulted in a rename/rename
conflict. Thus, that fix only made this test fail for a different
reason, and since the index == head check didn't happen until after
coming all the way back out of the recursion, the testcase had
enough information to pass the one check that it did perform.
So, load the index in builtin/merge-recursive.c, reload the in-memory
index in builtin/stash.c, and modify the t3030 testcase to correctly
setup the index and make sure that the test fails in the expected way
(meaning it reports a rename/rename conflict). This makes sure that
all callers actually make the index match head. The next commit will
then enforce the condition that index matches head earlier so this
problem doesn't return in the future.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2019-08-17 20:41:28 +02:00
|
|
|
if (repo_read_index_unmerged(the_repository))
|
|
|
|
|
die_resolve_conflict("merge");
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008-08-25 16:25:57 +02:00
|
|
|
o.branch1 = argv[++i];
|
|
|
|
|
o.branch2 = argv[++i];
|
Status update on merge-recursive in C
This is just an update for people being interested. Alex and me were
busy with that project for a few days now. While it has progressed nicely,
there are quite a couple TODOs in merge-recursive.c, just search for "TODO".
For impatient people: yes, it passes all the tests, and yes, according
to the evil test Alex did, it is faster than the Python script.
But no, it is not yet finished. Biggest points are:
- there are still three external calls
- in the end, it should not be necessary to write the index more than once
(just before exiting)
- a lot of things can be refactored to make the code easier and shorter
BTW we cannot just plug in git-merge-tree yet, because git-merge-tree
does not handle renames at all.
This patch is meant for testing, and as such,
- it compile the program to git-merge-recur
- it adjusts the scripts and tests to use git-merge-recur instead of
git-merge-recursive
- it provides "TEST", a script to execute the tests regarding -recursive
- it inlines the changes to read-cache.c (read_cache_from(), discard_cache()
and refresh_cache_entry())
Brought to you by Alex Riesen and Dscho
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-07-08 18:42:41 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2016-06-25 01:09:28 +02:00
|
|
|
if (get_oid(o.branch1, &h1))
|
2016-09-15 16:59:01 +02:00
|
|
|
die(_("could not resolve ref '%s'"), o.branch1);
|
2016-06-25 01:09:28 +02:00
|
|
|
if (get_oid(o.branch2, &h2))
|
2016-09-15 16:59:01 +02:00
|
|
|
die(_("could not resolve ref '%s'"), o.branch2);
|
Status update on merge-recursive in C
This is just an update for people being interested. Alex and me were
busy with that project for a few days now. While it has progressed nicely,
there are quite a couple TODOs in merge-recursive.c, just search for "TODO".
For impatient people: yes, it passes all the tests, and yes, according
to the evil test Alex did, it is faster than the Python script.
But no, it is not yet finished. Biggest points are:
- there are still three external calls
- in the end, it should not be necessary to write the index more than once
(just before exiting)
- a lot of things can be refactored to make the code easier and shorter
BTW we cannot just plug in git-merge-tree yet, because git-merge-tree
does not handle renames at all.
This patch is meant for testing, and as such,
- it compile the program to git-merge-recur
- it adjusts the scripts and tests to use git-merge-recur instead of
git-merge-recursive
- it provides "TEST", a script to execute the tests regarding -recursive
- it inlines the changes to read-cache.c (read_cache_from(), discard_cache()
and refresh_cache_entry())
Brought to you by Alex Riesen and Dscho
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-07-08 18:42:41 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2019-01-11 23:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
o.branch1 = better1 = better_branch_name(o.branch1);
|
|
|
|
|
o.branch2 = better2 = better_branch_name(o.branch2);
|
2007-01-14 06:28:58 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2008-08-25 16:25:57 +02:00
|
|
|
if (o.verbosity >= 3)
|
2016-09-15 16:59:02 +02:00
|
|
|
printf(_("Merging %s with %s\n"), o.branch1, o.branch2);
|
2006-12-23 09:44:47 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2016-06-25 01:09:28 +02:00
|
|
|
failed = merge_recursive_generic(&o, &h1, &h2, bases_count, bases, &result);
|
2019-01-11 23:16:55 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
free(better1);
|
|
|
|
|
free(better2);
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008-08-12 22:13:59 +02:00
|
|
|
if (failed < 0)
|
|
|
|
|
return 128; /* die() error code */
|
|
|
|
|
return failed;
|
Status update on merge-recursive in C
This is just an update for people being interested. Alex and me were
busy with that project for a few days now. While it has progressed nicely,
there are quite a couple TODOs in merge-recursive.c, just search for "TODO".
For impatient people: yes, it passes all the tests, and yes, according
to the evil test Alex did, it is faster than the Python script.
But no, it is not yet finished. Biggest points are:
- there are still three external calls
- in the end, it should not be necessary to write the index more than once
(just before exiting)
- a lot of things can be refactored to make the code easier and shorter
BTW we cannot just plug in git-merge-tree yet, because git-merge-tree
does not handle renames at all.
This patch is meant for testing, and as such,
- it compile the program to git-merge-recur
- it adjusts the scripts and tests to use git-merge-recur instead of
git-merge-recursive
- it provides "TEST", a script to execute the tests regarding -recursive
- it inlines the changes to read-cache.c (read_cache_from(), discard_cache()
and refresh_cache_entry())
Brought to you by Alex Riesen and Dscho
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-07-08 18:42:41 +02:00
|
|
|
}
|