Fix typos in code comments which repeat various words. Most of the
cases are simple in that they repeat a word that usually cannot be
repeated in a grammatically correct sentence. Just remove the
incorrectly duplicated word in these cases and rewrap text, if needed.
A tricky case is usage of "that that", which is sometimes grammatically
correct. However, an instance of this in "t7527-builtin-fsmonitor.sh"
doesn't need two words "that", because there is only one daemon being
discussed, so replace the second "that" with "the".
Reword code comment "entries exist on on-disk index" in function
update_one in file cache-tree.c, by replacing incorrect preposition "on"
with "in".
Signed-off-by: Andrei Rybak <rybak.a.v@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The previous commit added a `--merge-base` option in order to allow
using a specified merge-base for the merge. Extend the input accepted
by `--stdin` to also allow a specified merge-base with each merge
requested. For example:
printf "<b3> -- <b1> <b2>" | git merge-tree --stdin
does a merge of b1 and b2, and uses b3 as the merge-base.
Signed-off-by: Kyle Zhao <kylezhao@tencent.com>
Signed-off-by: Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com>
This patch will give our callers more flexibility to use `git merge-tree`,
such as:
git merge-tree --write-tree --merge-base=branch^ HEAD branch
This does a merge of HEAD and branch, but uses branch^ as the merge-base.
And the reason why using an option flag instead of a positional argument
is to allow additional commits passed to merge-tree to be handled via an
octopus merge in the future.
Signed-off-by: Kyle Zhao <kylezhao@tencent.com>
Signed-off-by: Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com>
Add an option, --stdin, to merge-tree which will accept lines of input
with two branches to merge per line, and which will perform all the
merges and give output for each in turn. This option implies -z, and
modifies the output to also include a merge status since the exit code
of the program can no longer convey that information now that multiple
merges are involved.
This could be useful, for example, by Git hosting providers. When one
branch is updated, one may want to check whether all code reviews
targetting that branch can still cleanly merge. Avoiding the overhead
of starting up a separate process for each of those code reviews might
provide significant savings in a repository with many code reviews.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
If the blob/tree objects cannot be written, we really need the merge
operations to fail, and not to continue (and then try to access the tree
object which is however still set to `NULL`).
Let's stop ignoring the return value of `write_object_file()` and
`write_tree()` and set `clean = -1` in the error case.
Reviewed-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The unusual use of:
printf "\\n" >>file &&
may give readers pause, making them wonder why this form was chosen over
the more typical:
printf "\n" >>file &&
However, even that may give pause since it is a somewhat unusual and
long-winded way of saying:
echo >>file &&
Therefore, replace `printf` with the more idiomatic `echo`, with the
hope of eliminating a possible stumbling block for those reading the
code.
Signed-off-by: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Fix &&-chain breaks in a couple tests which went unnoticed due to blind
spots in the &&-chain linters. In particular, the "magic exit code 117"
&&-chain checker built into test-lib.sh only recognizes broken &&-chains
at the top-level; it does not work within `{...}` groups, `(...)`
subshells, `$(...)` substitutions, or within bodies of compound
statements, such as `if`, `for`, `while`, `case`, etc. Furthermore,
`chainlint.sed`, which detects broken &&-chains only in `(...)`
subshells, missed these cases (which are in subshells) because it
(surprisingly) neglects to check for intact &&-chain on single-line
`for` loops.
While at it, explicitly signal failure of commands within the `for`
loops (which might arise due to the filesystem being full or "inode"
exhaustion). This is important since failures within `for` and `while`
loops can go unnoticed if not detected and signaled manually since the
loop itself does not abort when a contained command fails, nor will a
failure necessarily be detected when the loop finishes since the loop
returns the exit code of the last command it ran on the final iteration,
which may not be the command which failed.
Signed-off-by: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
It is a common pattern in this script to write the result of
`merge-tree -z` (NUL-termination mode) to an "actual" file and then
manually append a newline to that file so that it can be diff'd easily
with a hand-crafted "expect" file which itself ends with a newline since
it has been created by standard Unix tools which terminate lines by
default. For instance:
git merge-tree --write-tree -z ... >out &&
printf "\\n" >>out
anonymize_hash out >actual &&
q_to_nul <<-EOF >expect &&
...
EOF
test_cmp expect actual
However, one test gets this backward:
git merge-tree --write-tree -z ... >out &&
anonymize_hash out >actual &&
printf "\\n" >>actual
which means that, unlike all other cases, when anonymize_hash() is
called, the file being anonymized does not end with a newline. As a
result, this test fails on some platforms.
anonymize_hash() is implemented like this:
anonymize_hash() {
sed -e "s/[0-9a-f]\{40,\}/HASH/g" "$@"
}
The problem arises due to differences in behavior of various `sed`
implementations when fed an incomplete line (lacking a newline).
Although most modern `sed` implementations output such a line
unmolested (i.e. without a newline), some older `sed` implementations
forcibly add a newline to the incomplete line (giving the output an
extra unexpected newline), while other very old implementations simply
swallow an incomplete line and don't emit it at all (making the output
shorter than expected).
Fix this test by manually adding the newline before passing it through
`sed`, thus ensuring identical behavior with all `sed` implementation,
and bringing the test in line with other tests in this script.
Signed-off-by: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
This adds several tests of `merge-tree -z` extended conflict output
behavior to the testsuite, including some tests adapted from t6422.
These tests mark current behavior, not necessarily optimal behavior. In
particular, some path_msg() calls might want to include additional
paths.
These testcases also make something clear about the <Conflicted file>
info section of the output. That section consists of a sequence of
lines of the form
<mode> <object> <stage> <filename>
where <stage> is always greater than 0 (since each line comes from a
conflicted file). The lines correspond to conflicts that would be
placed in the index if we were doing a merge in a working tree. It is
perhaps natural to assume that for any given line, the <object> and
<filename> correspond to a single <revision>:<filename> pair from one of
the commits being merged (or from the merge base). This is true for
simple conflicts. However, these testcases make it clear that this is
not the case in general. For example, <object> may be the hash of a
three-way content merge of three different files (and with different
filenames).
The tests no longer pass under TEST_PASSES_SANITIZE_LEAK; it appears
that doing a directory rename with "git mv", among other possible
problems, triggers issues.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Mark those remaining tests that pass when run under SANITIZE=leak with
TEST_PASSES_SANITIZE_LEAK=true, these were either omitted in
f346fcb62a (Merge branch 'ab/mark-leak-free-tests-even-more',
2021-12-15) and 5a4f8381b6 (Merge branch 'ab/mark-leak-free-tests',
2021-10-25), or have had their memory leaks fixed since then.
With this change there's now a a one-to-one mapping between those
tests that we have opted-in via "TEST_PASSES_SANITIZE_LEAK=true", and
those that pass with the new "check" mode:
GIT_TEST_PASSING_SANITIZE_LEAK=check \
GIT_TEST_SANITIZE_LEAK_LOG=true \
make test SANITIZE=leak
Note that the "GIT_TEST_SANITIZE_LEAK_LOG=true" is needed due to the
edge cases noted in a preceding commit, i.e. in some cases we'd pass
the test itself, but still have outstanding leaks due to ignored exit
codes.
The "GIT_TEST_SANITIZE_LEAK_LOG=true" corrects for that, we're only
marking those tests as passing that really don't have any leaks,
whether that was reflected in their exit code or not.
Note that the change here to "t9100-git-svn-basic.sh" is marking that
test as passing under SANITIZE=leak, we're removing a
"TEST_FAILS_SANITIZE_LEAK=true" line, not
"TEST_PASSES_SANITIZE_LEAK=true". See 7a98d9ab00 (revisions API: have
release_revisions() release "cmdline", 2022-04-13) for the
introduction of that t/lib-git-svn.sh-specific variable.
Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Folks may want to merge histories that have no common ancestry; provide
a flag with the same name as used by `git merge` to allow this.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Much as `git ls-files` has a -z option, let's add one to merge-tree so
that the conflict-info section can be NUL terminated (and avoid quoting
of unusual filenames).
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Much like `git merge` updates the index with information of the form
(mode, oid, stage, name)
provide this output for conflicted files for merge-tree as well.
Provide a --name-only option for users to exclude the mode, oid, and
stage and only get the list of conflicted filenames.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Callers of `git merge-tree --write-tree` will often want to know which
files had conflicts. While they could potentially attempt to parse the
CONFLICT notices printed, those messages are not meant to be machine
readable. Provide a simpler mechanism of just printing the files (in
the same format as `git ls-files` with quoting, but restricted to
unmerged files) in the output before the free-form messages.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
When running `git merge-tree --write-tree`, we previously would only
return an exit status reflecting the cleanness of a merge, and print out
the toplevel tree of the resulting merge. Merges also have
informational messages, such as:
* "Auto-merging <PATH>"
* "CONFLICT (content): ..."
* "CONFLICT (file/directory)"
* etc.
In fact, when non-content conflicts occur (such as file/directory,
modify/delete, add/add with differing modes, rename/rename (1to2),
etc.), these informational messages may be the only notification the
user gets since these conflicts are not representable in the contents
of the file.
Add a --[no-]messages option so that callers can request these messages
be included at the end of the output. Include such messages by default
when there are conflicts, and omit them by default when the merge is
clean.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
This adds the ability to perform real merges rather than just trivial
merges (meaning handling three way content merges, recursive ancestor
consolidation, renames, proper directory/file conflict handling, and so
forth). However, unlike `git merge`, the working tree and index are
left alone and no branch is updated.
The only output is:
- the toplevel resulting tree printed on stdout
- exit status of 0 (clean), 1 (conflicts present), anything else
(merge could not be performed; unknown if clean or conflicted)
This output is meant to be used by some higher level script, perhaps in
a sequence of steps like this:
NEWTREE=$(git merge-tree --write-tree $BRANCH1 $BRANCH2)
test $? -eq 0 || die "There were conflicts..."
NEWCOMMIT=$(git commit-tree $NEWTREE -p $BRANCH1 -p $BRANCH2)
git update-ref $BRANCH1 $NEWCOMMIT
Note that higher level scripts may also want to access the
conflict/warning messages normally output during a merge, or have quick
access to a list of files with conflicts. That is not available in this
preliminary implementation, but subsequent commits will add that
ability (meaning that NEWTREE would be a lot more than a tree in the
case of conflicts).
This also marks the traditional trivial merge of merge-tree as
deprecated. The trivial merge not only had limited applicability, the
output format was also difficult to work with (and its format
undocumented), and will generally be less performant than real merges.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
