If a cherry-pick or merge with a rename results in a skippable update
(due to the merged content matching what HEAD already had), but the
working directory is dirty, avoid trying to refresh the index as that
will fail.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Four closely related changes all with the purpose of fixing error handling
in this function:
- fix reported function name in add_cacheinfo error messages
- differentiate between the two error messages
- abort early when we hit the error (stop ignoring return code)
- mark a test which was hitting this error as failing until we get the
right fix
In more detail...
In commit 0424138d57 ("Fix bogus error message from merge-recursive
error path", 2007-04-01), it was noted that the name of the function which
the error message claimed it was reported from did not match the actual
function name. This was changed to something closer to the real function
name, but it still didn't match the actual function name. Fix the
reported name to match.
Second, the two errors in this function had identical messages, preventing
us from knowing which error had been triggered. Add a couple words to the
second error message to differentiate the two.
Next, make sure callers do not ignore the return code so that it will stop
processing further entries (processing further entries could result in
more output which could cause the error to scroll off the screen, or at
least be missed by the user) and make it clear the error is the cause of
the early abort. These errors should never be triggered in production; if
either one is, it represents a bug in the calling path somewhere and is
likely to have resulted in mis-merged content. The combination of
ignoring of the return code and continuing to print other standard
messages after hitting the error resulted in the following bug report from
Junio: "...the command pretends that everything went well and merged
cleanly in that path...[Behaving] in a buggy and unexplainable way is bad
enough, doing so silently is unexcusable." Fix this.
Finally, there was one test in the testsuite that did hit this error path,
but was passing anyway. This would have been easy to miss since it had a
test_must_fail and thus could have failed for the wrong reason, but in a
separate testing step I added an intentional NULL-dereference to the
codepath where these error messages are printed in order to flush out such
cases. I could modify that test to explicitly check for this error and
fail the test if it is hit, but since this test operates in a bit of a
gray area and needed other changes, I went for a different fix. The gray
area this test operates in is the following: If the merge of a certain
file results in the same version of the file that existed in HEAD, but
there are dirty modifications to the file, is that an error with a
"Refusing to overwrite existing file" expected, or a case where the merge
should succeed since we shouldn't have to touch the dirty file anyway?
Recent discussion on the list leaned towards saying it should be a
success. Therefore, change the expected behavior of this test to match.
As a side effect, this makes the failed-due-to-hitting-add_cacheinfo-error
very clear, and we can mark the test as test_expect_failure. A subsequent
commit will implement the necessary changes to get this test to pass
again.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
This fixes an issue that existed before my directory rename detection
patches that affects both normal renames and renames implied by
directory rename detection. Additional codepaths that only affect
overwriting of dirty files that are involved in directory rename
detection will be added in a subsequent commit.
Reviewed-by: Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
This reverts commit e4bb62fa1e, reversing
changes made to 468165c1d8.
The topic appears to inflict severe regression in renaming merges,
even though the promise of it was that it would improve them.
We do not yet know which exact change in the topic was wrong, but in
the meantime, let's play it safe and revert it out of 'master'
before real Git-using projects are harmed.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Small test-helper programs have been consolidated into a single
binary.
* nd/combined-test-helper: (36 commits)
t/helper: merge test-write-cache into test-tool
t/helper: merge test-wildmatch into test-tool
t/helper: merge test-urlmatch-normalization into test-tool
t/helper: merge test-subprocess into test-tool
t/helper: merge test-submodule-config into test-tool
t/helper: merge test-string-list into test-tool
t/helper: merge test-strcmp-offset into test-tool
t/helper: merge test-sigchain into test-tool
t/helper: merge test-sha1-array into test-tool
t/helper: merge test-scrap-cache-tree into test-tool
t/helper: merge test-run-command into test-tool
t/helper: merge test-revision-walking into test-tool
t/helper: merge test-regex into test-tool
t/helper: merge test-ref-store into test-tool
t/helper: merge test-read-cache into test-tool
t/helper: merge test-prio-queue into test-tool
t/helper: merge test-path-utils into test-tool
t/helper: merge test-online-cpus into test-tool
t/helper: merge test-mktemp into test-tool
t/helper: merge (unused) test-mergesort into test-tool
...
This fixes an issue that existed before my directory rename detection
patches that affects both normal renames and renames implied by
directory rename detection. Additional codepaths that only affect
overwriting of dirty files that are involved in directory rename
detection will be added in a subsequent commit.
Reviewed-by: Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
t3501 had a testcase originally added in 05f2dfb965 (cherry-pick:
demonstrate a segmentation fault, 2016-11-26) to ensure cherry-pick
wouldn't segfault when working with a dirty file involved in a rename.
While the segfault was fixed, there was another problem this test
demonstrated: namely, that git would overwrite a dirty file involved in a
rename. Further, the test encoded a "successful merge" and overwriting of
this file as correct behavior. Modify the test so that it would still
catch the segfault, but to require the correct behavior. Mark it as
test_expect_failure for now too, since this second bug is not yet fixed.
t7607 had a test added in 30fd3a5425 (merge overwrites unstaged changes in
renamed file, 2012-04-15) specific to looking for a merge overwriting a
dirty file involved in a rename, but it too actually encoded what I would
term incorrect behavior: it expected the merge to succeed. Fix that, and
add a few more checks to make sure that the merge really does produce the
expected results.
Reviewed-By: Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Fix a corner case in merge-recursive regression that crept in
during 2.10 development cycle.
* jc/renormalize-merge-kill-safer-crlf:
convert: git cherry-pick -Xrenormalize did not work
merge-recursive: handle NULL in add_cacheinfo() correctly
cherry-pick: demonstrate a segmentation fault
1335d76e45 ("merge: avoid "safer crlf" during recording of merge
results", 2016-07-08) tried to split make_cache_entry() call made
with CE_MATCH_REFRESH into a call to make_cache_entry() without one,
followed by a call to add_cache_entry(), refresh_cache() and another
add_cache_entry() as needed. However the conversion was botched in
that it forgot that refresh_cache() can return NULL, which was
handled correctly in make_cache_entry() but in the updated code.
This fixes https://github.com/git-for-windows/git/issues/952
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
In https://github.com/git-for-windows/git/issues/952, a complicated
scenario was described that leads to a segmentation fault in
cherry-pick.
It boils down to a certain code path involving a renamed file that is
dirty, for which `refresh_cache_entry()` returns `NULL`, and that
`NULL` not being handled properly.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Quite a few error messages touched by this developer during the work to
speed up rebase -i started with an upper case letter, violating our
current conventions. Instead of sneaking in this fix (and forgetting
quite a few error messages), let's just have one wholesale patch fixing
all of the error messages in the sequencer.
While at it, the funny "error: Error wrapping up..." was changed to a
less funny, but more helpful, "error: failed to finalize...".
Pointed out by Junio Hamano.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
"git cherry-pick" without further options would segfault.
Could use a follow-up to handle '-' after argv[1] better.
* hu/cherry-pick-previous-branch:
cherry-pick: handle "-" after parsing options
Currently, we only try converting argv[1] from "-" into "@{-1}". This
means we do not notice "-" when used together with an option. Worse,
when "git cherry-pick" is run with no options, we segfault. Fix this
by doing the substitution after we have checked that there is
something in argv to cherry-pick and know any remaining options are
meant for the revision-listing machinery.
This still does not handle "-" after the first non-cherry-pick option.
For example,
git cherry-pick foo~2 - bar~5
and
git cherry-pick --no-merges -
will still dump usage.
Reported-by: Stefan Beller <stefanbeller@googlemail.com>
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
Just like "git checkout -" knows to check out and "git merge -"
knows to merge the branch you were previously on, "git cherry-pick"
now understands "git cherry-pick -" to pick from the previous
branch.
* hu/cherry-pick-previous-branch:
cherry-pick: allow "-" as abbreviation of '@{-1}'
"-" abbreviation is handy for "cherry-pick" like "checkout" and "merge".
It's also good for uniformity that a "-" stands as
the name of the previous branch where a branch name is
accepted and it could not mean any other things like stdin.
Signed-off-by: Hiroshige Umino <hiroshige88@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
cherry-picking into an unborn branch should work, so make it work,
with or without --ff.
Cherry-picking anything other than a commit that only adds files, will
naturally result in conflicts. Similarly, revert also works, but will
result in conflicts unless the specified revision only deletes files.
Signed-off-by: Martin von Zweigbergk <martinvonz@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Use the i18n-specific test functions in test scripts for parseopt tests.
This issue was was introduced in v1.7.10.1-488-g54e6d:
54e6d i18n: parseopt: lookup help and argument translations when showing usage
and been broken under GETTEXT_POISON=YesPlease since.
Signed-off-by: Jiang Xin <worldhello.net@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Translate the "Your local changes [...]" message without using the
`me' variable, instead split up the two messages so translators can
translate the whole messages as-is.
Reported-by: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
A stat-dirty index is not a detail that ought to concern the operator
of porcelain such as "git cherry-pick".
Without this change, a cherry-pick after copying a worktree with rsync
errors out with a misleading message.
$ git cherry-pick build/top
error: Your local changes to 'file.h' would be overwritten by merge. Aborting.
Please, commit your changes or stash them before you can merge.
Noticed-by: Pete Wyckoff <pw@padd.com>
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
* cc/cherry-pick-stdin:
revert: do not rebuild argv on heap
revert: accept arbitrary rev-list options
t3508 (cherry-pick): futureproof against unmerged files
Set options in struct rev_info directly so we can reuse the
arguments collected from parse_options without modification.
This is just a cleanup; no noticeable change is intended.
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The environment variable GIT_REFLOG_ACTION was used by git-commit.sh,
but when it was converted to a builtin
(f5bbc3225c, Port git commit to C,
Nov 8 2007) this was lost.
Let's use it again as it is more user friendly when reverting or
cherry-picking to see "revert" or "cherry-pick" in the reflog rather
than to just see "commit".
Signed-off-by: Christian Couder <chriscool@tuxfamily.org>
Acked-by: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Various commands refuse to run in the presence of conflicts (commit,
merge, pull, cherry-pick/revert). They all used to provide rough, and
inconsistant error messages.
A new variable advice.resolveconflict is introduced, and allows more
verbose messages, pointing the user to the appropriate solution.
For commit, the error message used to look like this:
$ git commit
foo.txt: needs merge
foo.txt: unmerged (c34a92682e0394bc0d6f4d4a67a8e2d32395c169)
foo.txt: unmerged (3afcd75de8de0bb5076942fcb17446be50451030)
foo.txt: unmerged (c9785d77b76dfe4fb038bf927ee518f6ae45ede4)
error: Error building trees
The "need merge" line is given by refresh_cache. We add the IN_PORCELAIN
option to make the output more consistant with the other porcelain
commands, and catch the error in return, to stop with a clean error
message. The next lines were displayed by a call to cache_tree_update(),
which is not reached anymore if we noticed the conflict.
The new output looks like:
U foo.txt
fatal: 'commit' is not possible because you have unmerged files.
Please, fix them up in the work tree, and then use 'git add/rm <file>' as
appropriate to mark resolution and make a commit, or use 'git commit -a'.
Pull is slightly modified to abort immediately if $GIT_DIR/MERGE_HEAD
exists instead of waiting for merge to complain.
The behavior of merge and the test-case are slightly modified to reflect
the usual flow: start with conflicts, fix them, and afterwards get rid of
MERGE_HEAD, with different error messages at each stage.
Signed-off-by: Matthieu Moy <Matthieu.Moy@imag.fr>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The basic idea of t3501 is to check whether revert
and cherry-pick works on renamed files.
But as there is no pure cherry-pick/revert test, it is
good to also check if commits are actually done in that
scenario.
Signed-off-by: Stephan Beyer <s-beyer@gmx.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The previous code mistakenly used wt_status_prepare to check whether the
index had anything commitable in it; however, that function is just an
init function, and will never report a dirty index.
The correct way with wt_status_* would be to call wt_status_print with the
output pointing to /dev/null or similar. However, that does extra work by
both examining the working tree and spewing status information to nowhere.
Instead, let's just implement the useful subset of wt_status_print as an
"is_index_dirty" function.
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
They are already set and exoprted by sourcing ./test-lib.sh
in all test scripts.
Signed-off-by: Kristian Høgsberg <krh@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
This makes revert and cherry-pick to use merge-recursive, to
allow them to notice renames. A pair of test scripts
demonstrate that an old change before a rename happened can be
applied (reverted) after a rename with cherry-pick (with revert).
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
