When comparing numbers such as "3" to "$(wc -l)", we should check for
numerical equality using -eq instead of string equality using = because
some implementations of wc output extra whitespace.
Signed-off-by: Brian Gernhardt <brian@gernhardtsoftware.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
When there are unmerged entries present, make sure to check for D/F
conflicts first and remove any files present in HEAD that would be in the
way of creating files below the correspondingly named directory. Such
files will be processed again at the end of the merge in
process_df_entry(); at that time we will be able to tell if we need to
and can reinstate the file, whether we need to place its contents in a
different file due to the directory still being present, etc.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
If all the paths below some directory involved in a D/F conflict were not
removed during the rest of the merge, then the contents of the file whose
path conflicted needs to be recorded in file with an alternative filename.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
If all the paths below some directory involved in a D/F conflict were not
removed during the rest of the merge, then the contents of the file whose
path conflicted needs to be recorded in file with an alternative filename.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
This function is called from process_df_entry(), near the end of the merge.
Rather than just checking whether one of the sides of the merge had a
directory at the same path as one of our files, check whether that
directory is still present by this point of our merge.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
If all the paths below some directory involved in a D/F conflict were not
removed during the rest of the merge, then the contents of the file whose
path conflicted needs to be recorded in file with an alternative filename.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Move the handling of content merging for renames from process_renames() to
process_df_entry().
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Move the handling of rename/rename conflicts where one file is renamed to
two different files, from process_renames() to process_df_entry().
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
When a commit moves A to B while another commit created B (or moved C to
B), and these two different commits serve as different merge-bases for a
later merge, c94736a (merge-recursive: don't segfault while handling
rename clashes 2009-07-30) added some special code to avoid segfaults.
Since that commit, the two versions of B are merged in place (which could
be potentially conflicting) and the intermediate result is used as the
virtual ancestor.
However, right before this special merge, try_merge was turned on, meaning
that process_renames() would try an alternative merge that ignores the
'add' part of the conflict, and, if the merge is clean, store that as the
new virtual ancestor. This could cause incorrect merging of criss-cross
merges; it would typically result in just recording a slightly confusing
merge base, but in some cases it could cause silent acceptance of one side
of a merge as the final resolution when a conflict should have been
flagged.
When we do a special merge for such a rename/add conflict between
merge-bases, turn try_merge off to avoid an inappropriate second merge.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
If merging two lines of development involves a rename/add conflict, and two
different people make such a merge but resolve it differently, and then
someone tries to merge the resulting two merges, then they should clearly
get a conflict due to the different resolutions from the previous
developers. However, in some such cases the conflict would not be detected
and git would silently accept one of the two versions being merged as the
final merge resolution.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
c94736a (merge-recursive: don't segfault while handling rename clashes
2009-07-30) added t6036 with a testcase that involved dual renames and a
criss-cross merge. Add a test that is nearly identical, but which also
involves content modification -- a case git currently does not merge
correctly.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
c94736a (merge-recursive: don't segfault while handling rename clashes
2009-07-30) added this testcase with an interesting corner case test,
which previously had cased git to segfault. This test ensures that the
segfault does not return and that the merge correctly fails; just add
some checks that verify the state of the index and worktree after the merge
are correct.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Add tests where one file is renamed to two different paths in different
sides of history, and where each of the new files matches the name of a
directory from the opposite side of history. Include tests for both the
case where the merge results in those directories not being cleanly
removed, and where those directories are cleanly removed during the merge.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
An interesting testcase is having two files each in their own subdirectory
getting renamed to the toplevel at the directory pathname of the other.
Questions arise as to whether the order of operations matters and whether
the directories can correctly get out of the way and make room for the
new files.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Having the source of a rename be involved in a directory/file conflict does
not currently pose any difficulties to the current merge-recursive
algorithm (in contrast to destinations of renames and D/F conflicts).
However, combining the two seemed like good testcases to include for
completeness.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
When merging two branches with some path involved in a D/F conflict, the
choice of which branch to merge into the other matters for (at least) two
reasons: (1) whether the working copy has a directory full of files that
is in the way of a file, or a file exists that is in the way of a
directory of files, (2) when the directory full of files does not disappear
due to the merge, what files at the same paths should be renamed to
(e.g. filename~HEAD vs. filename~otherbranch).
Add some tests that reverse the merge order of two other tests, and which
verify the contents are as expected (namely, that the results are identical
other than modified-for-uniqueness filenames involving branch names).
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Add testing of the various ways that a renamed file to a path involved in
a directory/file conflict may be involved in. This includes whether or not
there are conflicts of the contents of the renamed file (if the file was
modified on both sides of history), and whether the directory from the
other side of the merge will disappear as a result of the merge or not.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Previous D/F fixes I submitted (5a2580d and ae74548) had caused merge to
become excessively spammy, which was fixed in 96ecac6 (merge-recursive:
Avoid excessive output for and reprocessing of renames 2010-08-20). Add a
new test to avoid repeating that mistake with my several upcoming changes.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
d5af510 (RE: [PATCH] Avoid rename/add conflict when contents are identical
2010-09-01) avoided erroring out in a rename/add conflict when the contents
were identical. A simpler fix could have handled that particular testcase,
but it would not correctly handle the case where a symlink is involved.
Add another testcase using symlinks, to avoid breaking that case.
Signed-off-by: Ken Schalk <ken.schalk@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The ancient touch on Solaris 7 thinks that a decimal number supplied as
the first argument specifies a date_time to give to the files specified by
the remaining arguments. In this case, it fails to parse '1' as a proper
date_time and exits with a failure status. Workaround this flaw by
rearranging the arguments supplied to touch so that a non-digit appears
first and touch will not be confused.
Signed-off-by: Brandon Casey <casey@nrlssc.navy.mil>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
* jl/fix-test:
t1020: Get rid of 'cd "$HERE"' at the start of each test
t2016 (checkout -p): add missing &&
t1302 (core.repositoryversion): style tweaks
t2105 (gitfile): add missing &&
t1450 (fsck): remove dangling objects
tests: subshell indentation stylefix
Several tests: cd inside subshell instead of around
t7003-filter-branch.sh had a make_commit() function that was identical
to test_commit() in test-lib.sh except that it used tr to create a
lowercase file name from the uppercase branch name instead of
appending ".t".
Not only is this unneeded code duplication, it also was something
simply waiting to fail on case-insensitive file systems. So replace
all uses of make_commit with test_commit.
While we're editing the setup, chain it together with && so that
failures early in the sequence don't get lost and add a commit graph.
Signed-off-by: Brian Gernhardt <brian@gernhardtsoftware.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
When applying two pathspecs, one of which is named as a prefix to the
other, we mistakenly recursed into the shorter one.
Noticed and fixed by David Reis.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Previously (e3bf5e43), a test was added to test whether the builtin
xfuncname regular expressions could be compiled without error by regcomp.
Let's do the same for the word_regex patterns. This should help catch any
cross-platform incompatibilities that exist between the pattern creator's
system and the various platforms that the test suite is commonly run on.
Signed-off-by: Brandon Casey <casey@nrlssc.navy.mil>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Commit 6106ce46 introduced a test to demonstrate fetch's failure to
retrieve any objects or update FETCH_HEAD when it was supplied a repository
URL and the current branch had a configured merge spec. This commit
expands the original test based on comments from Junio Hamano. In addition
to actually verifying that the fetch updates FETCH_HEAD correctly, and does
not update the current branch, two more tests are added to ensure that the
merge configuration is ignored even when the supplied URL matches the URL
of the remote configured for the branch.
Signed-off-by: Brandon Casey <casey@nrlssc.navy.mil>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
On IRIX 6.5, the printf utility in /usr/bin does not appear to handle the
\ddd notation according to POSIX. This printf appears to halt processing
of the string argument and ignore any additional characters in the string.
Work around this flaw by replacing the \000's with 'Q' and using the
q_to_nul helper function provided by test-lib.sh
This problem with printf is not apparent when using the Bash shell since
Bash implements a POSIX compatible printf function internally.
Signed-off-by: Brandon Casey <casey@nrlssc.navy.mil>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
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>
When one side of a file rename matches a directory name on the other side,
the recursive merge strategy will fail. This is true even if the merge is
trivially resolvable.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
To achieve that, all cd commands which weren't inside a subshell had to
be put into a new one.
Signed-off-by: Jens Lehmann <Jens.Lehmann@web.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Although the set_state command is not likely to fail, it is best to
stay in the habit of checking for failures.
Cc: Thomas Rast <trast@student.ethz.ch>
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
This test is from 2007, which is late enough for the style to be
recognizably modern but still a while ago. Freshen it up to
follow new best practices:
- guard setup commands with test_expect_setup, so errors at
that stage can be caught;
- use <<\EOF in preference to <<EOF, to save reviewers the
trouble of looking for variable interpolations;
- use test_cmp instead of test "$foo" = "$bar", for better
output with -v on failure;
- indent commands in subshells and let them span multiple lines;
- combine the two "gitdir required mode" tests that do not make
as much sense alone.
Cc: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Make sure early failures are not masked by later successes.
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Brad King <brad.king@kitware.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The fsck test is generally careful to remove the corrupt objects
it inserts, but dangling objects are left behind due to some typos
and omissions. It is better to clean up more completely, to
simplify the addition of later tests. So:
- guard setup and cleanup with test_expect_success to catch
typos and errors;
- check both stdout and stderr when checking for empty fsck
output;
- use test_cmp empty file in place of test $(wc -l <file) = 0,
for better debugging output when running tests with -v;
- add a remove_object () helper and use it to replace broken
object removal code that forgot about the fanout in
.git/objects;
- disable gc.auto, to avoid tripping up object removal if the
number of objects ever reaches that threshold.
- use test_when_finished to ensure cleanup tasks are run and
succeed when tests fail;
- add a new final test that no breakage or dangling objects
was left behind.
While at it, add a brief description to test_description of the
history that is expected to persist between tests.
Part of a campaign to clean up subshell usage in tests.
Cc: Thomas Rast <trast@student.ethz.ch>
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Format the subshells introduced by the previous patch (Several tests:
cd inside subshell instead of around, 2010-09-06) like so:
(
cd subdir &&
...
) &&
This is generally easier to read and has the nice side-effect that
this patch will show what commands are used in the subshell, making
it easier to check for lost environment variables and similar
behavior changes.
Cc: Jens Lehmann <Jens.Lehmann@web.de>
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
* jk/test-must-fail-missing:
tests: make test_might_fail fail on missing commands
tests: make test_might_fail more verbose
tests: make test_must_fail fail on missing commands
tests: make test_must_fail more verbose
* bc/maint-fetch-url-only:
builtin/fetch.c: ignore merge config when not fetching from branch's remote
t/t5510: demonstrate failure to fetch when current branch has merge ref
