Since "git rm" is supposed to be porcelain, we should convince it to
be user friendly by refreshing the index itself.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
* maint:
GIT 1.5.6.4
builtin-rm: fix index lock file path
http-fetch: do not SEGV after fetching a bad pack idx file
rev-list: honor --quiet option
api-run-command.txt: typofix
When hold_locked_index() is called with a relative git_dir and you are
outside the work tree, the lock file become relative to the current
directory. So when later setup_work_tree() change the current directory
it breaks lock file path and commit_locked_index() fails.
This patch move index locking code after setup_work_tree() call to make
lock file relative to the working tree as it should be and add a test
case.
Noticed by Nick Andrew.
Signed-off-by: Olivier Marin <dkr@freesurf.fr>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
This patch changes every occurrence of "! git" -- with the meaning
that a git call has to gracefully fail -- into "test_must_fail git".
This is useful to
- make sure the test does not fail because of a signal,
e.g. SIGSEGV, and
- advertise the use of "test_must_fail" for new tests.
Signed-off-by: Stephan Beyer <s-beyer@gmx.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Originally, test_expect_failure was designed to be the opposite
of test_expect_success, but this was a bad decision. Most tests
run a series of commands that leads to the single command that
needs to be tested, like this:
test_expect_{success,failure} 'test title' '
setup1 &&
setup2 &&
setup3 &&
what is to be tested
'
And expecting a failure exit from the whole sequence misses the
point of writing tests. Your setup$N that are supposed to
succeed may have failed without even reaching what you are
trying to test. The only valid use of test_expect_failure is to
check a trivial single command that is expected to fail, which
is a minority in tests of Porcelain-ish commands.
This large-ish patch rewrites all uses of test_expect_failure to
use test_expect_success and rewrites the condition of what is
tested, like this:
test_expect_success 'test title' '
setup1 &&
setup2 &&
setup3 &&
! this command should fail
'
test_expect_failure is redefined to serve as a reminder that
that test *should* succeed but due to a known breakage in git it
currently does not pass. So if git-foo command should create a
file 'bar' but you discovered a bug that it doesn't, you can
write a test like this:
test_expect_failure 'git-foo should create bar' '
rm -f bar &&
git foo &&
test -f bar
'
This construct acts similar to test_expect_success, but instead
of reporting "ok/FAIL" like test_expect_success does, the
outcome is reported as "FIXED/still broken".
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
There is nothing _wrong_ with egrep per se, but this way we
would have less dependency on external tools.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
In the previous behavior, "git-rm --cached" (without -f) had the same
restriction as "git-rm". This forced the user to use the -f flag in
situations which weren't actually dangerous, like:
$ git add foo # oops, I didn't want this
$ git rm --cached foo # back to initial situation
Previously, the index had to match the file *and* the HEAD. With
--cached, the index must now match the file *or* the HEAD. The behavior
without --cached is unchanged, but provides better error messages.
Signed-off-by: Matthieu Moy <Matthieu.Moy@imag.fr>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Moved the setup commands into test_expect_success blocks so their
output is hidden unless -v is used. This makes the test suite look
a little cleaner when the rm test-file setup step fails (and was
expected to fail for most cases).
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
When running t3600-rm test under fakeroot (or as root), we
cannot make a file unremovable with "chmod a-w .". Detect this
case early and skip that test.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
New tests are added to the git-rm test case to cover this as well.
Signed-off-by: Carl Worth <cworth@cworth.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
This adds a git-rm command which provides convenience similar to
git-add, (and a bit more since it takes care of the rm as well if
given -f).
Like git-add, git-rm expands the given path names through
git-ls-files. This means it only acts on files listed in the
index. And it does act recursively on directories by default, (no -r
needed as in the case of rm itself). When it recurses, it does not
remove empty directories that are left behind.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
