1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/git/git.git synced 2024-11-15 05:33:04 +01:00
git/t/t3600-rm.sh

885 lines
24 KiB
Bash
Raw Normal View History

#!/bin/sh
#
# Copyright (c) 2006 Carl D. Worth
#
test_description='Test of the various options to git rm.'
. ./test-lib.sh
# Setup some files to be removed, some with funny characters
test_expect_success \
'Initialize test directory' \
"touch -- foo bar baz 'space embedded' -q &&
git add -- foo bar baz 'space embedded' -q &&
git commit -m 'add normal files'"
if touch -- 'tab embedded' 'newline
embedded' 2>/dev/null
then
test_set_prereq FUNNYNAMES
else
say 'Your filesystem does not allow tabs in filenames.'
fi
test_expect_success FUNNYNAMES 'add files with funny names' "
git add -- 'tab embedded' 'newline
embedded' &&
git commit -m 'add files with tabs and newlines'
"
test_expect_success \
'Pre-check that foo exists and is in index before git rm foo' \
'[ -f foo ] && git ls-files --error-unmatch foo'
test_expect_success \
'Test that git rm foo succeeds' \
'git rm --cached foo'
test_expect_success \
'Test that git rm --cached foo succeeds if the index matches the file' \
'echo content >foo &&
git add foo &&
git rm --cached foo'
test_expect_success \
'Test that git rm --cached foo succeeds if the index matches the file' \
'echo content >foo &&
git add foo &&
git commit -m foo &&
echo "other content" >foo &&
git rm --cached foo'
Sane use of test_expect_failure 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$N that are supposed to succeed may have failed without even reaching what you are trying to test. The only valid use of test_expect_failure is to check a trivial single command that is expected to fail, which is a minority in tests of Porcelain-ish commands. This large-ish patch rewrites all uses of test_expect_failure to use test_expect_success and rewrites the condition of what is tested, like this: test_expect_success 'test title' ' setup1 && setup2 && setup3 && ! this command should fail ' test_expect_failure is redefined to serve as a reminder that that test *should* succeed but due to a known breakage in git it currently does not pass. So if git-foo command should create a file 'bar' but you discovered a bug that it doesn't, you can write a test like this: test_expect_failure 'git-foo should create bar' ' rm -f bar && git foo && test -f bar ' This construct acts similar to test_expect_success, but instead of reporting "ok/FAIL" like test_expect_success does, the outcome is reported as "FIXED/still broken". Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2008-02-01 10:50:53 +01:00
test_expect_success \
'Test that git rm --cached foo fails if the index matches neither the file nor HEAD' '
echo content >foo &&
git add foo &&
git commit -m foo --allow-empty &&
echo "other content" >foo &&
git add foo &&
echo "yet another content" >foo &&
test_must_fail git rm --cached foo
Sane use of test_expect_failure Originally, test_expect_failure was designed to be the opposite of test_expect_success, but this was a bad decision. Most tests run a series of commands that leads to the single command that needs to be tested, like this: test_expect_{success,failure} 'test title' ' setup1 && setup2 && setup3 && what is to be tested ' And expecting a failure exit from the whole sequence misses the point of writing tests. Your setup$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>
2008-02-01 10:50:53 +01:00
'
test_expect_success \
'Test that git rm --cached -f foo works in case where --cached only did not' \
'echo content >foo &&
git add foo &&
git commit -m foo --allow-empty &&
echo "other content" >foo &&
git add foo &&
echo "yet another content" >foo &&
git rm --cached -f foo'
test_expect_success \
'Post-check that foo exists but is not in index after git rm foo' \
'[ -f foo ] && test_must_fail git ls-files --error-unmatch foo'
test_expect_success \
'Pre-check that bar exists and is in index before "git rm bar"' \
'[ -f bar ] && git ls-files --error-unmatch bar'
test_expect_success \
'Test that "git rm bar" succeeds' \
'git rm bar'
test_expect_success \
'Post-check that bar does not exist and is not in index after "git rm -f bar"' \
'! [ -f bar ] && test_must_fail git ls-files --error-unmatch bar'
test_expect_success \
'Test that "git rm -- -q" succeeds (remove a file that looks like an option)' \
'git rm -- -q'
test_expect_success FUNNYNAMES \
"Test that \"git rm -f\" succeeds with embedded space, tab, or newline characters." \
"git rm -f 'space embedded' 'tab embedded' 'newline
embedded'"
test_expect_success SANITY 'Test that "git rm -f" fails if its rm fails' '
chmod a-w . &&
test_must_fail git rm -f baz &&
chmod 775 .
'
test_expect_success \
'When the rm in "git rm -f" fails, it should not remove the file from the index' \
'git ls-files --error-unmatch baz'
test_expect_success 'Remove nonexistent file with --ignore-unmatch' '
git rm --ignore-unmatch nonexistent
'
test_expect_success '"rm" command printed' '
echo frotz > test-file &&
git add test-file &&
git commit -m "add file for rm test" &&
git rm test-file > rm-output &&
test `grep "^rm " rm-output | wc -l` = 1 &&
rm -f test-file rm-output &&
git commit -m "remove file from rm test"
'
test_expect_success '"rm" command suppressed with --quiet' '
echo frotz > test-file &&
git add test-file &&
git commit -m "add file for rm --quiet test" &&
git rm --quiet test-file > rm-output &&
test `wc -l < rm-output` = 0 &&
rm -f test-file rm-output &&
git commit -m "remove file from rm --quiet test"
'
# Now, failure cases.
test_expect_success 'Re-add foo and baz' '
git add foo baz &&
git ls-files --error-unmatch foo baz
'
test_expect_success 'Modify foo -- rm should refuse' '
echo >>foo &&
test_must_fail git rm foo baz &&
test -f foo &&
test -f baz &&
git ls-files --error-unmatch foo baz
'
test_expect_success 'Modified foo -- rm -f should work' '
git rm -f foo baz &&
test ! -f foo &&
test ! -f baz &&
test_must_fail git ls-files --error-unmatch foo &&
test_must_fail git ls-files --error-unmatch bar
'
test_expect_success 'Re-add foo and baz for HEAD tests' '
echo frotz >foo &&
git checkout HEAD -- baz &&
git add foo baz &&
git ls-files --error-unmatch foo baz
'
test_expect_success 'foo is different in index from HEAD -- rm should refuse' '
test_must_fail git rm foo baz &&
test -f foo &&
test -f baz &&
git ls-files --error-unmatch foo baz
'
test_expect_success 'but with -f it should work.' '
git rm -f foo baz &&
test ! -f foo &&
test ! -f baz &&
test_must_fail git ls-files --error-unmatch foo &&
test_must_fail git ls-files --error-unmatch baz
'
test_expect_success 'refuse to remove cached empty file with modifications' '
>empty &&
rm: loosen safety valve for empty files If a file is different between the working tree copy, the index, and the HEAD, then we do not allow it to be deleted without --force. However, this is overly tight in the face of "git add --intent-to-add": $ git add --intent-to-add file $ : oops, I don't actually want to stage that yet $ git rm --cached file error: 'empty' has staged content different from both the file and the HEAD (use -f to force removal) $ git rm -f --cached file Unfortunately, there is currently no way to distinguish between an empty file that has been added and an "intent to add" file. The ideal behavior would be to disallow the former while allowing the latter. This patch loosens the safety valve to allow the deletion only if we are deleting the cached entry and the cached content is empty. This covers the intent-to-add situation, and assumes there is little harm in not protecting users who have legitimately added an empty file. In many cases, the file will still be empty, in which case the safety valve does not trigger anyway (since the content remains untouched in the working tree). Otherwise, we do remove the fact that no content was staged, but given that the content is by definition empty, it is not terribly difficult for a user to recreate it. However, we still document the desired behavior in the form of two tests. One checks the correct removal of an intent-to-add file. The other checks that we still disallow removal of empty files, but is marked as expect_failure to indicate this compromise. If the intent-to-add feature is ever extended to differentiate between normal empty files and intent-to-add files, then the safety valve can be re-tightened. Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2008-10-21 15:54:19 +02:00
git add empty &&
echo content >empty &&
test_must_fail git rm --cached empty
'
test_expect_success 'remove intent-to-add file without --force' '
echo content >intent-to-add &&
git add -N intent-to-add &&
rm: loosen safety valve for empty files If a file is different between the working tree copy, the index, and the HEAD, then we do not allow it to be deleted without --force. However, this is overly tight in the face of "git add --intent-to-add": $ git add --intent-to-add file $ : oops, I don't actually want to stage that yet $ git rm --cached file error: 'empty' has staged content different from both the file and the HEAD (use -f to force removal) $ git rm -f --cached file Unfortunately, there is currently no way to distinguish between an empty file that has been added and an "intent to add" file. The ideal behavior would be to disallow the former while allowing the latter. This patch loosens the safety valve to allow the deletion only if we are deleting the cached entry and the cached content is empty. This covers the intent-to-add situation, and assumes there is little harm in not protecting users who have legitimately added an empty file. In many cases, the file will still be empty, in which case the safety valve does not trigger anyway (since the content remains untouched in the working tree). Otherwise, we do remove the fact that no content was staged, but given that the content is by definition empty, it is not terribly difficult for a user to recreate it. However, we still document the desired behavior in the form of two tests. One checks the correct removal of an intent-to-add file. The other checks that we still disallow removal of empty files, but is marked as expect_failure to indicate this compromise. If the intent-to-add feature is ever extended to differentiate between normal empty files and intent-to-add files, then the safety valve can be re-tightened. Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2008-10-21 15:54:19 +02:00
git rm --cached intent-to-add
'
test_expect_success 'Recursive test setup' '
mkdir -p frotz &&
echo qfwfq >frotz/nitfol &&
git add frotz &&
git commit -m "subdir test"
'
test_expect_success 'Recursive without -r fails' '
test_must_fail git rm frotz &&
test -d frotz &&
test -f frotz/nitfol
'
test_expect_success 'Recursive with -r but dirty' '
echo qfwfq >>frotz/nitfol &&
test_must_fail git rm -r frotz &&
test -d frotz &&
test -f frotz/nitfol
'
test_expect_success 'Recursive with -r -f' '
git rm -f -r frotz &&
! test -f frotz/nitfol &&
! test -d frotz
'
Sane use of test_expect_failure 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>
2008-02-01 10:50:53 +01:00
test_expect_success 'Remove nonexistent file returns nonzero exit status' '
test_must_fail git rm nonexistent
'
test_expect_success 'Call "rm" from outside the work tree' '
mkdir repo &&
(cd repo &&
git init &&
echo something > somefile &&
git add somefile &&
git commit -m "add a file" &&
(cd .. &&
git --git-dir=repo/.git --work-tree=repo rm somefile) &&
test_must_fail git ls-files --error-unmatch somefile)
'
test_expect_success 'refresh index before checking if it is up-to-date' '
git reset --hard &&
test-chmtime -86400 frotz/nitfol &&
git rm frotz/nitfol &&
test ! -f frotz/nitfol
'
test_expect_success 'choking "git rm" should not let it die with cruft' '
git reset -q --hard &&
test_when_finished "rm -f .git/index.lock && git reset -q --hard" &&
i=0 &&
while test $i -lt 12000
do
echo "100644 1234567890123456789012345678901234567890 0 some-file-$i"
i=$(( $i + 1 ))
done | git update-index --index-info &&
git rm -n "some-file-*" | : &&
test_path_is_missing .git/index.lock
'
test_expect_success 'rm removes subdirectories recursively' '
mkdir -p dir/subdir/subsubdir &&
echo content >dir/subdir/subsubdir/file &&
git add dir/subdir/subsubdir/file &&
git rm -f dir/subdir/subsubdir/file &&
! test -d dir
'
submodule: teach rm to remove submodules unless they contain a git directory Currently using "git rm" on a submodule - populated or not - fails with this error: fatal: git rm: '<submodule path>': Is a directory This made sense in the past as there was no way to remove a submodule without possibly removing unpushed parts of the submodule's history contained in its .git directory too, so erroring out here protected the user from possible loss of data. But submodules cloned with a recent git version do not contain the .git directory anymore, they use a gitfile to point to their git directory which is safely stored inside the superproject's .git directory. The work tree of these submodules can safely be removed without losing history, so let's teach git to do so. Using rm on an unpopulated submodule now removes the empty directory from the work tree and the gitlink from the index. If the submodule's directory is missing from the work tree, it will still be removed from the index. Using rm on a populated submodule using a gitfile will apply the usual checks for work tree modification adapted to submodules (unless forced). For a submodule that means that the HEAD is the same as recorded in the index, no tracked files are modified and no untracked files that aren't ignored are present in the submodules work tree (ignored files are deemed expendable and won't stop a submodule's work tree from being removed). That logic has to be applied in all nested submodules too. Using rm on a submodule which has its .git directory inside the work trees top level directory will just error out like it did before to protect the repository, even when forced. In the future git could either provide a message informing the user to convert the submodule to use a gitfile or even attempt to do the conversion itself, but that is not part of this change. Signed-off-by: Jens Lehmann <Jens.Lehmann@web.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2012-09-26 20:21:13 +02:00
cat >expect <<EOF
rm: delete .gitmodules entry of submodules removed from the work tree Currently using "git rm" on a submodule removes the submodule's work tree from that of the superproject and the gitlink from the index. But the submodule's section in .gitmodules is left untouched, which is a leftover of the now removed submodule and might irritate users (as opposed to the setting in .git/config, this must stay as a reminder that the user showed interest in this submodule so it will be repopulated later when an older commit is checked out). Let "git rm" help the user by not only removing the submodule from the work tree but by also removing the "submodule.<submodule name>" section from the .gitmodules file and stage both. This doesn't happen when the "--cached" option is used, as it would modify the work tree. This also silently does nothing when no .gitmodules file is found and only issues a warning when it doesn't have a section for this submodule. This is because the user might just use plain gitlinks without the .gitmodules file or has already removed the section by hand before issuing the "git rm" command (in which case the warning reminds him that rm would have done that for him). Only when .gitmodules is found and contains merge conflicts the rm command will fail and tell the user to resolve the conflict before trying again. Also extend the man page to inform the user about this new feature. While at it promote the submodule sub-section to a chapter as it made not much sense under "REMOVING FILES THAT HAVE DISAPPEARED FROM THE FILESYSTEM". In t7610 three uses of "git rm submod" had to be replaced with "git rm --cached submod" because that test expects .gitmodules and the work tree to stay untouched. Also in t7400 the tests for the remaining settings in the .gitmodules file had to be changed to assert that these settings are missing. Signed-off-by: Jens Lehmann <Jens.Lehmann@web.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2013-08-06 21:15:25 +02:00
M .gitmodules
submodule: teach rm to remove submodules unless they contain a git directory Currently using "git rm" on a submodule - populated or not - fails with this error: fatal: git rm: '<submodule path>': Is a directory This made sense in the past as there was no way to remove a submodule without possibly removing unpushed parts of the submodule's history contained in its .git directory too, so erroring out here protected the user from possible loss of data. But submodules cloned with a recent git version do not contain the .git directory anymore, they use a gitfile to point to their git directory which is safely stored inside the superproject's .git directory. The work tree of these submodules can safely be removed without losing history, so let's teach git to do so. Using rm on an unpopulated submodule now removes the empty directory from the work tree and the gitlink from the index. If the submodule's directory is missing from the work tree, it will still be removed from the index. Using rm on a populated submodule using a gitfile will apply the usual checks for work tree modification adapted to submodules (unless forced). For a submodule that means that the HEAD is the same as recorded in the index, no tracked files are modified and no untracked files that aren't ignored are present in the submodules work tree (ignored files are deemed expendable and won't stop a submodule's work tree from being removed). That logic has to be applied in all nested submodules too. Using rm on a submodule which has its .git directory inside the work trees top level directory will just error out like it did before to protect the repository, even when forced. In the future git could either provide a message informing the user to convert the submodule to use a gitfile or even attempt to do the conversion itself, but that is not part of this change. Signed-off-by: Jens Lehmann <Jens.Lehmann@web.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2012-09-26 20:21:13 +02:00
D submod
EOF
cat >expect.modified <<EOF
M submod
EOF
rm: delete .gitmodules entry of submodules removed from the work tree Currently using "git rm" on a submodule removes the submodule's work tree from that of the superproject and the gitlink from the index. But the submodule's section in .gitmodules is left untouched, which is a leftover of the now removed submodule and might irritate users (as opposed to the setting in .git/config, this must stay as a reminder that the user showed interest in this submodule so it will be repopulated later when an older commit is checked out). Let "git rm" help the user by not only removing the submodule from the work tree but by also removing the "submodule.<submodule name>" section from the .gitmodules file and stage both. This doesn't happen when the "--cached" option is used, as it would modify the work tree. This also silently does nothing when no .gitmodules file is found and only issues a warning when it doesn't have a section for this submodule. This is because the user might just use plain gitlinks without the .gitmodules file or has already removed the section by hand before issuing the "git rm" command (in which case the warning reminds him that rm would have done that for him). Only when .gitmodules is found and contains merge conflicts the rm command will fail and tell the user to resolve the conflict before trying again. Also extend the man page to inform the user about this new feature. While at it promote the submodule sub-section to a chapter as it made not much sense under "REMOVING FILES THAT HAVE DISAPPEARED FROM THE FILESYSTEM". In t7610 three uses of "git rm submod" had to be replaced with "git rm --cached submod" because that test expects .gitmodules and the work tree to stay untouched. Also in t7400 the tests for the remaining settings in the .gitmodules file had to be changed to assert that these settings are missing. Signed-off-by: Jens Lehmann <Jens.Lehmann@web.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2013-08-06 21:15:25 +02:00
cat >expect.cached <<EOF
D submod
EOF
cat >expect.both_deleted<<EOF
D .gitmodules
D submod
EOF
submodule: teach rm to remove submodules unless they contain a git directory Currently using "git rm" on a submodule - populated or not - fails with this error: fatal: git rm: '<submodule path>': Is a directory This made sense in the past as there was no way to remove a submodule without possibly removing unpushed parts of the submodule's history contained in its .git directory too, so erroring out here protected the user from possible loss of data. But submodules cloned with a recent git version do not contain the .git directory anymore, they use a gitfile to point to their git directory which is safely stored inside the superproject's .git directory. The work tree of these submodules can safely be removed without losing history, so let's teach git to do so. Using rm on an unpopulated submodule now removes the empty directory from the work tree and the gitlink from the index. If the submodule's directory is missing from the work tree, it will still be removed from the index. Using rm on a populated submodule using a gitfile will apply the usual checks for work tree modification adapted to submodules (unless forced). For a submodule that means that the HEAD is the same as recorded in the index, no tracked files are modified and no untracked files that aren't ignored are present in the submodules work tree (ignored files are deemed expendable and won't stop a submodule's work tree from being removed). That logic has to be applied in all nested submodules too. Using rm on a submodule which has its .git directory inside the work trees top level directory will just error out like it did before to protect the repository, even when forced. In the future git could either provide a message informing the user to convert the submodule to use a gitfile or even attempt to do the conversion itself, but that is not part of this change. Signed-off-by: Jens Lehmann <Jens.Lehmann@web.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2012-09-26 20:21:13 +02:00
test_expect_success 'rm removes empty submodules from work tree' '
mkdir submod &&
git update-index --add --cacheinfo 160000 $(git rev-parse HEAD) submod &&
git config -f .gitmodules submodule.sub.url ./. &&
git config -f .gitmodules submodule.sub.path submod &&
git submodule init &&
git add .gitmodules &&
git commit -m "add submodule" &&
git rm submod &&
test ! -e submod &&
git status -s -uno --ignore-submodules=none > actual &&
rm: delete .gitmodules entry of submodules removed from the work tree Currently using "git rm" on a submodule removes the submodule's work tree from that of the superproject and the gitlink from the index. But the submodule's section in .gitmodules is left untouched, which is a leftover of the now removed submodule and might irritate users (as opposed to the setting in .git/config, this must stay as a reminder that the user showed interest in this submodule so it will be repopulated later when an older commit is checked out). Let "git rm" help the user by not only removing the submodule from the work tree but by also removing the "submodule.<submodule name>" section from the .gitmodules file and stage both. This doesn't happen when the "--cached" option is used, as it would modify the work tree. This also silently does nothing when no .gitmodules file is found and only issues a warning when it doesn't have a section for this submodule. This is because the user might just use plain gitlinks without the .gitmodules file or has already removed the section by hand before issuing the "git rm" command (in which case the warning reminds him that rm would have done that for him). Only when .gitmodules is found and contains merge conflicts the rm command will fail and tell the user to resolve the conflict before trying again. Also extend the man page to inform the user about this new feature. While at it promote the submodule sub-section to a chapter as it made not much sense under "REMOVING FILES THAT HAVE DISAPPEARED FROM THE FILESYSTEM". In t7610 three uses of "git rm submod" had to be replaced with "git rm --cached submod" because that test expects .gitmodules and the work tree to stay untouched. Also in t7400 the tests for the remaining settings in the .gitmodules file had to be changed to assert that these settings are missing. Signed-off-by: Jens Lehmann <Jens.Lehmann@web.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2013-08-06 21:15:25 +02:00
test_cmp expect actual &&
test_must_fail git config -f .gitmodules submodule.sub.url &&
test_must_fail git config -f .gitmodules submodule.sub.path
submodule: teach rm to remove submodules unless they contain a git directory Currently using "git rm" on a submodule - populated or not - fails with this error: fatal: git rm: '<submodule path>': Is a directory This made sense in the past as there was no way to remove a submodule without possibly removing unpushed parts of the submodule's history contained in its .git directory too, so erroring out here protected the user from possible loss of data. But submodules cloned with a recent git version do not contain the .git directory anymore, they use a gitfile to point to their git directory which is safely stored inside the superproject's .git directory. The work tree of these submodules can safely be removed without losing history, so let's teach git to do so. Using rm on an unpopulated submodule now removes the empty directory from the work tree and the gitlink from the index. If the submodule's directory is missing from the work tree, it will still be removed from the index. Using rm on a populated submodule using a gitfile will apply the usual checks for work tree modification adapted to submodules (unless forced). For a submodule that means that the HEAD is the same as recorded in the index, no tracked files are modified and no untracked files that aren't ignored are present in the submodules work tree (ignored files are deemed expendable and won't stop a submodule's work tree from being removed). That logic has to be applied in all nested submodules too. Using rm on a submodule which has its .git directory inside the work trees top level directory will just error out like it did before to protect the repository, even when forced. In the future git could either provide a message informing the user to convert the submodule to use a gitfile or even attempt to do the conversion itself, but that is not part of this change. Signed-off-by: Jens Lehmann <Jens.Lehmann@web.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2012-09-26 20:21:13 +02:00
'
rm: delete .gitmodules entry of submodules removed from the work tree Currently using "git rm" on a submodule removes the submodule's work tree from that of the superproject and the gitlink from the index. But the submodule's section in .gitmodules is left untouched, which is a leftover of the now removed submodule and might irritate users (as opposed to the setting in .git/config, this must stay as a reminder that the user showed interest in this submodule so it will be repopulated later when an older commit is checked out). Let "git rm" help the user by not only removing the submodule from the work tree but by also removing the "submodule.<submodule name>" section from the .gitmodules file and stage both. This doesn't happen when the "--cached" option is used, as it would modify the work tree. This also silently does nothing when no .gitmodules file is found and only issues a warning when it doesn't have a section for this submodule. This is because the user might just use plain gitlinks without the .gitmodules file or has already removed the section by hand before issuing the "git rm" command (in which case the warning reminds him that rm would have done that for him). Only when .gitmodules is found and contains merge conflicts the rm command will fail and tell the user to resolve the conflict before trying again. Also extend the man page to inform the user about this new feature. While at it promote the submodule sub-section to a chapter as it made not much sense under "REMOVING FILES THAT HAVE DISAPPEARED FROM THE FILESYSTEM". In t7610 three uses of "git rm submod" had to be replaced with "git rm --cached submod" because that test expects .gitmodules and the work tree to stay untouched. Also in t7400 the tests for the remaining settings in the .gitmodules file had to be changed to assert that these settings are missing. Signed-off-by: Jens Lehmann <Jens.Lehmann@web.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2013-08-06 21:15:25 +02:00
test_expect_success 'rm removes removed submodule from index and .gitmodules' '
submodule: teach rm to remove submodules unless they contain a git directory Currently using "git rm" on a submodule - populated or not - fails with this error: fatal: git rm: '<submodule path>': Is a directory This made sense in the past as there was no way to remove a submodule without possibly removing unpushed parts of the submodule's history contained in its .git directory too, so erroring out here protected the user from possible loss of data. But submodules cloned with a recent git version do not contain the .git directory anymore, they use a gitfile to point to their git directory which is safely stored inside the superproject's .git directory. The work tree of these submodules can safely be removed without losing history, so let's teach git to do so. Using rm on an unpopulated submodule now removes the empty directory from the work tree and the gitlink from the index. If the submodule's directory is missing from the work tree, it will still be removed from the index. Using rm on a populated submodule using a gitfile will apply the usual checks for work tree modification adapted to submodules (unless forced). For a submodule that means that the HEAD is the same as recorded in the index, no tracked files are modified and no untracked files that aren't ignored are present in the submodules work tree (ignored files are deemed expendable and won't stop a submodule's work tree from being removed). That logic has to be applied in all nested submodules too. Using rm on a submodule which has its .git directory inside the work trees top level directory will just error out like it did before to protect the repository, even when forced. In the future git could either provide a message informing the user to convert the submodule to use a gitfile or even attempt to do the conversion itself, but that is not part of this change. Signed-off-by: Jens Lehmann <Jens.Lehmann@web.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2012-09-26 20:21:13 +02:00
git reset --hard &&
git submodule update &&
rm -rf submod &&
git rm submod &&
git status -s -uno --ignore-submodules=none > actual &&
rm: delete .gitmodules entry of submodules removed from the work tree Currently using "git rm" on a submodule removes the submodule's work tree from that of the superproject and the gitlink from the index. But the submodule's section in .gitmodules is left untouched, which is a leftover of the now removed submodule and might irritate users (as opposed to the setting in .git/config, this must stay as a reminder that the user showed interest in this submodule so it will be repopulated later when an older commit is checked out). Let "git rm" help the user by not only removing the submodule from the work tree but by also removing the "submodule.<submodule name>" section from the .gitmodules file and stage both. This doesn't happen when the "--cached" option is used, as it would modify the work tree. This also silently does nothing when no .gitmodules file is found and only issues a warning when it doesn't have a section for this submodule. This is because the user might just use plain gitlinks without the .gitmodules file or has already removed the section by hand before issuing the "git rm" command (in which case the warning reminds him that rm would have done that for him). Only when .gitmodules is found and contains merge conflicts the rm command will fail and tell the user to resolve the conflict before trying again. Also extend the man page to inform the user about this new feature. While at it promote the submodule sub-section to a chapter as it made not much sense under "REMOVING FILES THAT HAVE DISAPPEARED FROM THE FILESYSTEM". In t7610 three uses of "git rm submod" had to be replaced with "git rm --cached submod" because that test expects .gitmodules and the work tree to stay untouched. Also in t7400 the tests for the remaining settings in the .gitmodules file had to be changed to assert that these settings are missing. Signed-off-by: Jens Lehmann <Jens.Lehmann@web.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2013-08-06 21:15:25 +02:00
test_cmp expect actual &&
test_must_fail git config -f .gitmodules submodule.sub.url &&
test_must_fail git config -f .gitmodules submodule.sub.path
submodule: teach rm to remove submodules unless they contain a git directory Currently using "git rm" on a submodule - populated or not - fails with this error: fatal: git rm: '<submodule path>': Is a directory This made sense in the past as there was no way to remove a submodule without possibly removing unpushed parts of the submodule's history contained in its .git directory too, so erroring out here protected the user from possible loss of data. But submodules cloned with a recent git version do not contain the .git directory anymore, they use a gitfile to point to their git directory which is safely stored inside the superproject's .git directory. The work tree of these submodules can safely be removed without losing history, so let's teach git to do so. Using rm on an unpopulated submodule now removes the empty directory from the work tree and the gitlink from the index. If the submodule's directory is missing from the work tree, it will still be removed from the index. Using rm on a populated submodule using a gitfile will apply the usual checks for work tree modification adapted to submodules (unless forced). For a submodule that means that the HEAD is the same as recorded in the index, no tracked files are modified and no untracked files that aren't ignored are present in the submodules work tree (ignored files are deemed expendable and won't stop a submodule's work tree from being removed). That logic has to be applied in all nested submodules too. Using rm on a submodule which has its .git directory inside the work trees top level directory will just error out like it did before to protect the repository, even when forced. In the future git could either provide a message informing the user to convert the submodule to use a gitfile or even attempt to do the conversion itself, but that is not part of this change. Signed-off-by: Jens Lehmann <Jens.Lehmann@web.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2012-09-26 20:21:13 +02:00
'
test_expect_success 'rm removes work tree of unmodified submodules' '
git reset --hard &&
git submodule update &&
git rm submod &&
test ! -d submod &&
git status -s -uno --ignore-submodules=none > actual &&
rm: delete .gitmodules entry of submodules removed from the work tree Currently using "git rm" on a submodule removes the submodule's work tree from that of the superproject and the gitlink from the index. But the submodule's section in .gitmodules is left untouched, which is a leftover of the now removed submodule and might irritate users (as opposed to the setting in .git/config, this must stay as a reminder that the user showed interest in this submodule so it will be repopulated later when an older commit is checked out). Let "git rm" help the user by not only removing the submodule from the work tree but by also removing the "submodule.<submodule name>" section from the .gitmodules file and stage both. This doesn't happen when the "--cached" option is used, as it would modify the work tree. This also silently does nothing when no .gitmodules file is found and only issues a warning when it doesn't have a section for this submodule. This is because the user might just use plain gitlinks without the .gitmodules file or has already removed the section by hand before issuing the "git rm" command (in which case the warning reminds him that rm would have done that for him). Only when .gitmodules is found and contains merge conflicts the rm command will fail and tell the user to resolve the conflict before trying again. Also extend the man page to inform the user about this new feature. While at it promote the submodule sub-section to a chapter as it made not much sense under "REMOVING FILES THAT HAVE DISAPPEARED FROM THE FILESYSTEM". In t7610 three uses of "git rm submod" had to be replaced with "git rm --cached submod" because that test expects .gitmodules and the work tree to stay untouched. Also in t7400 the tests for the remaining settings in the .gitmodules file had to be changed to assert that these settings are missing. Signed-off-by: Jens Lehmann <Jens.Lehmann@web.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2013-08-06 21:15:25 +02:00
test_cmp expect actual &&
test_must_fail git config -f .gitmodules submodule.sub.url &&
test_must_fail git config -f .gitmodules submodule.sub.path
submodule: teach rm to remove submodules unless they contain a git directory Currently using "git rm" on a submodule - populated or not - fails with this error: fatal: git rm: '<submodule path>': Is a directory This made sense in the past as there was no way to remove a submodule without possibly removing unpushed parts of the submodule's history contained in its .git directory too, so erroring out here protected the user from possible loss of data. But submodules cloned with a recent git version do not contain the .git directory anymore, they use a gitfile to point to their git directory which is safely stored inside the superproject's .git directory. The work tree of these submodules can safely be removed without losing history, so let's teach git to do so. Using rm on an unpopulated submodule now removes the empty directory from the work tree and the gitlink from the index. If the submodule's directory is missing from the work tree, it will still be removed from the index. Using rm on a populated submodule using a gitfile will apply the usual checks for work tree modification adapted to submodules (unless forced). For a submodule that means that the HEAD is the same as recorded in the index, no tracked files are modified and no untracked files that aren't ignored are present in the submodules work tree (ignored files are deemed expendable and won't stop a submodule's work tree from being removed). That logic has to be applied in all nested submodules too. Using rm on a submodule which has its .git directory inside the work trees top level directory will just error out like it did before to protect the repository, even when forced. In the future git could either provide a message informing the user to convert the submodule to use a gitfile or even attempt to do the conversion itself, but that is not part of this change. Signed-off-by: Jens Lehmann <Jens.Lehmann@web.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2012-09-26 20:21:13 +02:00
'
test_expect_success 'rm removes a submodule with a trailing /' '
git reset --hard &&
git submodule update &&
git rm submod/ &&
test ! -d submod &&
git status -s -uno --ignore-submodules=none > actual &&
test_cmp expect actual
'
test_expect_success 'rm fails when given a file with a trailing /' '
test_must_fail git rm empty/
'
test_expect_success 'rm succeeds when given a directory with a trailing /' '
git rm -r frotz/
'
submodule: teach rm to remove submodules unless they contain a git directory Currently using "git rm" on a submodule - populated or not - fails with this error: fatal: git rm: '<submodule path>': Is a directory This made sense in the past as there was no way to remove a submodule without possibly removing unpushed parts of the submodule's history contained in its .git directory too, so erroring out here protected the user from possible loss of data. But submodules cloned with a recent git version do not contain the .git directory anymore, they use a gitfile to point to their git directory which is safely stored inside the superproject's .git directory. The work tree of these submodules can safely be removed without losing history, so let's teach git to do so. Using rm on an unpopulated submodule now removes the empty directory from the work tree and the gitlink from the index. If the submodule's directory is missing from the work tree, it will still be removed from the index. Using rm on a populated submodule using a gitfile will apply the usual checks for work tree modification adapted to submodules (unless forced). For a submodule that means that the HEAD is the same as recorded in the index, no tracked files are modified and no untracked files that aren't ignored are present in the submodules work tree (ignored files are deemed expendable and won't stop a submodule's work tree from being removed). That logic has to be applied in all nested submodules too. Using rm on a submodule which has its .git directory inside the work trees top level directory will just error out like it did before to protect the repository, even when forced. In the future git could either provide a message informing the user to convert the submodule to use a gitfile or even attempt to do the conversion itself, but that is not part of this change. Signed-off-by: Jens Lehmann <Jens.Lehmann@web.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2012-09-26 20:21:13 +02:00
test_expect_success 'rm of a populated submodule with different HEAD fails unless forced' '
git reset --hard &&
git submodule update &&
(cd submod &&
git checkout HEAD^
) &&
test_must_fail git rm submod &&
test -d submod &&
test -f submod/.git &&
git status -s -uno --ignore-submodules=none > actual &&
test_cmp expect.modified actual &&
git rm -f submod &&
test ! -d submod &&
git status -s -uno --ignore-submodules=none > actual &&
rm: delete .gitmodules entry of submodules removed from the work tree Currently using "git rm" on a submodule removes the submodule's work tree from that of the superproject and the gitlink from the index. But the submodule's section in .gitmodules is left untouched, which is a leftover of the now removed submodule and might irritate users (as opposed to the setting in .git/config, this must stay as a reminder that the user showed interest in this submodule so it will be repopulated later when an older commit is checked out). Let "git rm" help the user by not only removing the submodule from the work tree but by also removing the "submodule.<submodule name>" section from the .gitmodules file and stage both. This doesn't happen when the "--cached" option is used, as it would modify the work tree. This also silently does nothing when no .gitmodules file is found and only issues a warning when it doesn't have a section for this submodule. This is because the user might just use plain gitlinks without the .gitmodules file or has already removed the section by hand before issuing the "git rm" command (in which case the warning reminds him that rm would have done that for him). Only when .gitmodules is found and contains merge conflicts the rm command will fail and tell the user to resolve the conflict before trying again. Also extend the man page to inform the user about this new feature. While at it promote the submodule sub-section to a chapter as it made not much sense under "REMOVING FILES THAT HAVE DISAPPEARED FROM THE FILESYSTEM". In t7610 three uses of "git rm submod" had to be replaced with "git rm --cached submod" because that test expects .gitmodules and the work tree to stay untouched. Also in t7400 the tests for the remaining settings in the .gitmodules file had to be changed to assert that these settings are missing. Signed-off-by: Jens Lehmann <Jens.Lehmann@web.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2013-08-06 21:15:25 +02:00
test_cmp expect actual &&
test_must_fail git config -f .gitmodules submodule.sub.url &&
test_must_fail git config -f .gitmodules submodule.sub.path
'
test_expect_success 'rm --cached leaves work tree of populated submodules and .gitmodules alone' '
git reset --hard &&
git submodule update &&
git rm --cached submod &&
test -d submod &&
test -f submod/.git &&
git status -s -uno >actual &&
test_cmp expect.cached actual &&
git config -f .gitmodules submodule.sub.url &&
git config -f .gitmodules submodule.sub.path
'
test_expect_success 'rm --dry-run does not touch the submodule or .gitmodules' '
git reset --hard &&
git submodule update &&
git rm -n submod &&
test -f submod/.git &&
git diff-index --exit-code HEAD
'
test_expect_success 'rm does not complain when no .gitmodules file is found' '
git reset --hard &&
git submodule update &&
git rm .gitmodules &&
git rm submod >actual 2>actual.err &&
! test -s actual.err &&
! test -d submod &&
! test -f submod/.git &&
git status -s -uno >actual &&
test_cmp expect.both_deleted actual
'
test_expect_success 'rm will error out on a modified .gitmodules file unless staged' '
git reset --hard &&
git submodule update &&
git config -f .gitmodules foo.bar true &&
test_must_fail git rm submod >actual 2>actual.err &&
test -s actual.err &&
test -d submod &&
test -f submod/.git &&
git diff-files --quiet -- submod &&
git add .gitmodules &&
git rm submod >actual 2>actual.err &&
! test -s actual.err &&
! test -d submod &&
! test -f submod/.git &&
git status -s -uno >actual &&
test_cmp expect actual
'
test_expect_success 'rm issues a warning when section is not found in .gitmodules' '
git reset --hard &&
git submodule update &&
git config -f .gitmodules --remove-section submodule.sub &&
git add .gitmodules &&
echo "warning: Could not find section in .gitmodules where path=submod" >expect.err &&
git rm submod >actual 2>actual.err &&
test_i18ncmp expect.err actual.err &&
! test -d submod &&
! test -f submod/.git &&
git status -s -uno >actual &&
submodule: teach rm to remove submodules unless they contain a git directory Currently using "git rm" on a submodule - populated or not - fails with this error: fatal: git rm: '<submodule path>': Is a directory This made sense in the past as there was no way to remove a submodule without possibly removing unpushed parts of the submodule's history contained in its .git directory too, so erroring out here protected the user from possible loss of data. But submodules cloned with a recent git version do not contain the .git directory anymore, they use a gitfile to point to their git directory which is safely stored inside the superproject's .git directory. The work tree of these submodules can safely be removed without losing history, so let's teach git to do so. Using rm on an unpopulated submodule now removes the empty directory from the work tree and the gitlink from the index. If the submodule's directory is missing from the work tree, it will still be removed from the index. Using rm on a populated submodule using a gitfile will apply the usual checks for work tree modification adapted to submodules (unless forced). For a submodule that means that the HEAD is the same as recorded in the index, no tracked files are modified and no untracked files that aren't ignored are present in the submodules work tree (ignored files are deemed expendable and won't stop a submodule's work tree from being removed). That logic has to be applied in all nested submodules too. Using rm on a submodule which has its .git directory inside the work trees top level directory will just error out like it did before to protect the repository, even when forced. In the future git could either provide a message informing the user to convert the submodule to use a gitfile or even attempt to do the conversion itself, but that is not part of this change. Signed-off-by: Jens Lehmann <Jens.Lehmann@web.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2012-09-26 20:21:13 +02:00
test_cmp expect actual
'
test_expect_success 'rm of a populated submodule with modifications fails unless forced' '
git reset --hard &&
git submodule update &&
(cd submod &&
echo X >empty
) &&
test_must_fail git rm submod &&
test -d submod &&
test -f submod/.git &&
git status -s -uno --ignore-submodules=none > actual &&
test_cmp expect.modified actual &&
git rm -f submod &&
test ! -d submod &&
git status -s -uno --ignore-submodules=none > actual &&
test_cmp expect actual
'
test_expect_success 'rm of a populated submodule with untracked files fails unless forced' '
git reset --hard &&
git submodule update &&
(cd submod &&
echo X >untracked
) &&
test_must_fail git rm submod &&
test -d submod &&
test -f submod/.git &&
git status -s -uno --ignore-submodules=none > actual &&
test_cmp expect.modified actual &&
git rm -f submod &&
test ! -d submod &&
git status -s -uno --ignore-submodules=none > actual &&
test_cmp expect actual
'
test_expect_success 'setup submodule conflict' '
git reset --hard &&
git submodule update &&
git checkout -b branch1 &&
echo 1 >nitfol &&
git add nitfol &&
git commit -m "added nitfol 1" &&
git checkout -b branch2 master &&
echo 2 >nitfol &&
git add nitfol &&
git commit -m "added nitfol 2" &&
git checkout -b conflict1 master &&
(cd submod &&
git fetch &&
git checkout branch1
) &&
git add submod &&
git commit -m "submod 1" &&
git checkout -b conflict2 master &&
(cd submod &&
git checkout branch2
) &&
git add submod &&
git commit -m "submod 2"
'
cat >expect.conflict <<EOF
UU submod
EOF
test_expect_success 'rm removes work tree of unmodified conflicted submodule' '
git checkout conflict1 &&
git reset --hard &&
git submodule update &&
test_must_fail git merge conflict2 &&
git rm submod &&
test ! -d submod &&
git status -s -uno --ignore-submodules=none > actual &&
test_cmp expect actual
'
test_expect_success 'rm of a conflicted populated submodule with different HEAD fails unless forced' '
git checkout conflict1 &&
git reset --hard &&
git submodule update &&
(cd submod &&
git checkout HEAD^
) &&
test_must_fail git merge conflict2 &&
test_must_fail git rm submod &&
test -d submod &&
test -f submod/.git &&
git status -s -uno --ignore-submodules=none > actual &&
test_cmp expect.conflict actual &&
git rm -f submod &&
test ! -d submod &&
git status -s -uno --ignore-submodules=none > actual &&
rm: delete .gitmodules entry of submodules removed from the work tree Currently using "git rm" on a submodule removes the submodule's work tree from that of the superproject and the gitlink from the index. But the submodule's section in .gitmodules is left untouched, which is a leftover of the now removed submodule and might irritate users (as opposed to the setting in .git/config, this must stay as a reminder that the user showed interest in this submodule so it will be repopulated later when an older commit is checked out). Let "git rm" help the user by not only removing the submodule from the work tree but by also removing the "submodule.<submodule name>" section from the .gitmodules file and stage both. This doesn't happen when the "--cached" option is used, as it would modify the work tree. This also silently does nothing when no .gitmodules file is found and only issues a warning when it doesn't have a section for this submodule. This is because the user might just use plain gitlinks without the .gitmodules file or has already removed the section by hand before issuing the "git rm" command (in which case the warning reminds him that rm would have done that for him). Only when .gitmodules is found and contains merge conflicts the rm command will fail and tell the user to resolve the conflict before trying again. Also extend the man page to inform the user about this new feature. While at it promote the submodule sub-section to a chapter as it made not much sense under "REMOVING FILES THAT HAVE DISAPPEARED FROM THE FILESYSTEM". In t7610 three uses of "git rm submod" had to be replaced with "git rm --cached submod" because that test expects .gitmodules and the work tree to stay untouched. Also in t7400 the tests for the remaining settings in the .gitmodules file had to be changed to assert that these settings are missing. Signed-off-by: Jens Lehmann <Jens.Lehmann@web.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2013-08-06 21:15:25 +02:00
test_cmp expect actual &&
test_must_fail git config -f .gitmodules submodule.sub.url &&
test_must_fail git config -f .gitmodules submodule.sub.path
submodule: teach rm to remove submodules unless they contain a git directory Currently using "git rm" on a submodule - populated or not - fails with this error: fatal: git rm: '<submodule path>': Is a directory This made sense in the past as there was no way to remove a submodule without possibly removing unpushed parts of the submodule's history contained in its .git directory too, so erroring out here protected the user from possible loss of data. But submodules cloned with a recent git version do not contain the .git directory anymore, they use a gitfile to point to their git directory which is safely stored inside the superproject's .git directory. The work tree of these submodules can safely be removed without losing history, so let's teach git to do so. Using rm on an unpopulated submodule now removes the empty directory from the work tree and the gitlink from the index. If the submodule's directory is missing from the work tree, it will still be removed from the index. Using rm on a populated submodule using a gitfile will apply the usual checks for work tree modification adapted to submodules (unless forced). For a submodule that means that the HEAD is the same as recorded in the index, no tracked files are modified and no untracked files that aren't ignored are present in the submodules work tree (ignored files are deemed expendable and won't stop a submodule's work tree from being removed). That logic has to be applied in all nested submodules too. Using rm on a submodule which has its .git directory inside the work trees top level directory will just error out like it did before to protect the repository, even when forced. In the future git could either provide a message informing the user to convert the submodule to use a gitfile or even attempt to do the conversion itself, but that is not part of this change. Signed-off-by: Jens Lehmann <Jens.Lehmann@web.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2012-09-26 20:21:13 +02:00
'
test_expect_success 'rm of a conflicted populated submodule with modifications fails unless forced' '
git checkout conflict1 &&
git reset --hard &&
git submodule update &&
(cd submod &&
echo X >empty
) &&
test_must_fail git merge conflict2 &&
test_must_fail git rm submod &&
test -d submod &&
test -f submod/.git &&
git status -s -uno --ignore-submodules=none > actual &&
test_cmp expect.conflict actual &&
git rm -f submod &&
test ! -d submod &&
git status -s -uno --ignore-submodules=none > actual &&
rm: delete .gitmodules entry of submodules removed from the work tree Currently using "git rm" on a submodule removes the submodule's work tree from that of the superproject and the gitlink from the index. But the submodule's section in .gitmodules is left untouched, which is a leftover of the now removed submodule and might irritate users (as opposed to the setting in .git/config, this must stay as a reminder that the user showed interest in this submodule so it will be repopulated later when an older commit is checked out). Let "git rm" help the user by not only removing the submodule from the work tree but by also removing the "submodule.<submodule name>" section from the .gitmodules file and stage both. This doesn't happen when the "--cached" option is used, as it would modify the work tree. This also silently does nothing when no .gitmodules file is found and only issues a warning when it doesn't have a section for this submodule. This is because the user might just use plain gitlinks without the .gitmodules file or has already removed the section by hand before issuing the "git rm" command (in which case the warning reminds him that rm would have done that for him). Only when .gitmodules is found and contains merge conflicts the rm command will fail and tell the user to resolve the conflict before trying again. Also extend the man page to inform the user about this new feature. While at it promote the submodule sub-section to a chapter as it made not much sense under "REMOVING FILES THAT HAVE DISAPPEARED FROM THE FILESYSTEM". In t7610 three uses of "git rm submod" had to be replaced with "git rm --cached submod" because that test expects .gitmodules and the work tree to stay untouched. Also in t7400 the tests for the remaining settings in the .gitmodules file had to be changed to assert that these settings are missing. Signed-off-by: Jens Lehmann <Jens.Lehmann@web.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2013-08-06 21:15:25 +02:00
test_cmp expect actual &&
test_must_fail git config -f .gitmodules submodule.sub.url &&
test_must_fail git config -f .gitmodules submodule.sub.path
submodule: teach rm to remove submodules unless they contain a git directory Currently using "git rm" on a submodule - populated or not - fails with this error: fatal: git rm: '<submodule path>': Is a directory This made sense in the past as there was no way to remove a submodule without possibly removing unpushed parts of the submodule's history contained in its .git directory too, so erroring out here protected the user from possible loss of data. But submodules cloned with a recent git version do not contain the .git directory anymore, they use a gitfile to point to their git directory which is safely stored inside the superproject's .git directory. The work tree of these submodules can safely be removed without losing history, so let's teach git to do so. Using rm on an unpopulated submodule now removes the empty directory from the work tree and the gitlink from the index. If the submodule's directory is missing from the work tree, it will still be removed from the index. Using rm on a populated submodule using a gitfile will apply the usual checks for work tree modification adapted to submodules (unless forced). For a submodule that means that the HEAD is the same as recorded in the index, no tracked files are modified and no untracked files that aren't ignored are present in the submodules work tree (ignored files are deemed expendable and won't stop a submodule's work tree from being removed). That logic has to be applied in all nested submodules too. Using rm on a submodule which has its .git directory inside the work trees top level directory will just error out like it did before to protect the repository, even when forced. In the future git could either provide a message informing the user to convert the submodule to use a gitfile or even attempt to do the conversion itself, but that is not part of this change. Signed-off-by: Jens Lehmann <Jens.Lehmann@web.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2012-09-26 20:21:13 +02:00
'
test_expect_success 'rm of a conflicted populated submodule with untracked files fails unless forced' '
git checkout conflict1 &&
git reset --hard &&
git submodule update &&
(cd submod &&
echo X >untracked
) &&
test_must_fail git merge conflict2 &&
test_must_fail git rm submod &&
test -d submod &&
test -f submod/.git &&
git status -s -uno --ignore-submodules=none > actual &&
test_cmp expect.conflict actual &&
git rm -f submod &&
test ! -d submod &&
git status -s -uno --ignore-submodules=none > actual &&
test_cmp expect actual
'
test_expect_success 'rm of a conflicted populated submodule with a .git directory fails even when forced' '
git checkout conflict1 &&
git reset --hard &&
git submodule update &&
(cd submod &&
rm .git &&
cp -R ../.git/modules/sub .git &&
submodule: teach rm to remove submodules unless they contain a git directory Currently using "git rm" on a submodule - populated or not - fails with this error: fatal: git rm: '<submodule path>': Is a directory This made sense in the past as there was no way to remove a submodule without possibly removing unpushed parts of the submodule's history contained in its .git directory too, so erroring out here protected the user from possible loss of data. But submodules cloned with a recent git version do not contain the .git directory anymore, they use a gitfile to point to their git directory which is safely stored inside the superproject's .git directory. The work tree of these submodules can safely be removed without losing history, so let's teach git to do so. Using rm on an unpopulated submodule now removes the empty directory from the work tree and the gitlink from the index. If the submodule's directory is missing from the work tree, it will still be removed from the index. Using rm on a populated submodule using a gitfile will apply the usual checks for work tree modification adapted to submodules (unless forced). For a submodule that means that the HEAD is the same as recorded in the index, no tracked files are modified and no untracked files that aren't ignored are present in the submodules work tree (ignored files are deemed expendable and won't stop a submodule's work tree from being removed). That logic has to be applied in all nested submodules too. Using rm on a submodule which has its .git directory inside the work trees top level directory will just error out like it did before to protect the repository, even when forced. In the future git could either provide a message informing the user to convert the submodule to use a gitfile or even attempt to do the conversion itself, but that is not part of this change. Signed-off-by: Jens Lehmann <Jens.Lehmann@web.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2012-09-26 20:21:13 +02:00
GIT_WORK_TREE=. git config --unset core.worktree
) &&
test_must_fail git merge conflict2 &&
test_must_fail git rm submod &&
test -d submod &&
test -d submod/.git &&
git status -s -uno --ignore-submodules=none > actual &&
test_cmp expect.conflict actual &&
test_must_fail git rm -f submod &&
test -d submod &&
test -d submod/.git &&
git status -s -uno --ignore-submodules=none > actual &&
test_cmp expect.conflict actual &&
git merge --abort &&
rm -rf submod
'
test_expect_success 'rm of a conflicted unpopulated submodule succeeds' '
git checkout conflict1 &&
git reset --hard &&
test_must_fail git merge conflict2 &&
git rm submod &&
test ! -d submod &&
git status -s -uno --ignore-submodules=none > actual &&
test_cmp expect actual
'
test_expect_success 'rm of a populated submodule with a .git directory fails even when forced' '
git checkout -f master &&
git reset --hard &&
git submodule update &&
(cd submod &&
rm .git &&
cp -R ../.git/modules/sub .git &&
submodule: teach rm to remove submodules unless they contain a git directory Currently using "git rm" on a submodule - populated or not - fails with this error: fatal: git rm: '<submodule path>': Is a directory This made sense in the past as there was no way to remove a submodule without possibly removing unpushed parts of the submodule's history contained in its .git directory too, so erroring out here protected the user from possible loss of data. But submodules cloned with a recent git version do not contain the .git directory anymore, they use a gitfile to point to their git directory which is safely stored inside the superproject's .git directory. The work tree of these submodules can safely be removed without losing history, so let's teach git to do so. Using rm on an unpopulated submodule now removes the empty directory from the work tree and the gitlink from the index. If the submodule's directory is missing from the work tree, it will still be removed from the index. Using rm on a populated submodule using a gitfile will apply the usual checks for work tree modification adapted to submodules (unless forced). For a submodule that means that the HEAD is the same as recorded in the index, no tracked files are modified and no untracked files that aren't ignored are present in the submodules work tree (ignored files are deemed expendable and won't stop a submodule's work tree from being removed). That logic has to be applied in all nested submodules too. Using rm on a submodule which has its .git directory inside the work trees top level directory will just error out like it did before to protect the repository, even when forced. In the future git could either provide a message informing the user to convert the submodule to use a gitfile or even attempt to do the conversion itself, but that is not part of this change. Signed-off-by: Jens Lehmann <Jens.Lehmann@web.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2012-09-26 20:21:13 +02:00
GIT_WORK_TREE=. git config --unset core.worktree
) &&
test_must_fail git rm submod &&
test -d submod &&
test -d submod/.git &&
git status -s -uno --ignore-submodules=none > actual &&
! test -s actual &&
test_must_fail git rm -f submod &&
test -d submod &&
test -d submod/.git &&
git status -s -uno --ignore-submodules=none > actual &&
! test -s actual &&
rm -rf submod
'
cat >expect.deepmodified <<EOF
M submod/subsubmod
EOF
test_expect_success 'setup subsubmodule' '
git reset --hard &&
git submodule update &&
(cd submod &&
git update-index --add --cacheinfo 160000 $(git rev-parse HEAD) subsubmod &&
git config -f .gitmodules submodule.sub.url ../. &&
git config -f .gitmodules submodule.sub.path subsubmod &&
git submodule init &&
git add .gitmodules &&
git commit -m "add subsubmodule" &&
git submodule update subsubmod
) &&
git commit -a -m "added deep submodule"
'
test_expect_success 'rm recursively removes work tree of unmodified submodules' '
git rm submod &&
test ! -d submod &&
git status -s -uno --ignore-submodules=none > actual &&
test_cmp expect actual
'
test_expect_success 'rm of a populated nested submodule with different nested HEAD fails unless forced' '
git reset --hard &&
git submodule update --recursive &&
(cd submod/subsubmod &&
git checkout HEAD^
) &&
test_must_fail git rm submod &&
test -d submod &&
test -f submod/.git &&
git status -s -uno --ignore-submodules=none > actual &&
test_cmp expect.modified actual &&
git rm -f submod &&
test ! -d submod &&
git status -s -uno --ignore-submodules=none > actual &&
test_cmp expect actual
'
test_expect_success 'rm of a populated nested submodule with nested modifications fails unless forced' '
git reset --hard &&
git submodule update --recursive &&
(cd submod/subsubmod &&
echo X >empty
) &&
test_must_fail git rm submod &&
test -d submod &&
test -f submod/.git &&
git status -s -uno --ignore-submodules=none > actual &&
test_cmp expect.modified actual &&
git rm -f submod &&
test ! -d submod &&
git status -s -uno --ignore-submodules=none > actual &&
test_cmp expect actual
'
test_expect_success 'rm of a populated nested submodule with nested untracked files fails unless forced' '
git reset --hard &&
git submodule update --recursive &&
(cd submod/subsubmod &&
echo X >untracked
) &&
test_must_fail git rm submod &&
test -d submod &&
test -f submod/.git &&
git status -s -uno --ignore-submodules=none > actual &&
test_cmp expect.modified actual &&
git rm -f submod &&
test ! -d submod &&
git status -s -uno --ignore-submodules=none > actual &&
test_cmp expect actual
'
test_expect_success 'rm of a populated nested submodule with a nested .git directory fails even when forced' '
git reset --hard &&
git submodule update --recursive &&
(cd submod/subsubmod &&
rm .git &&
cp -R ../../.git/modules/sub/modules/sub .git &&
submodule: teach rm to remove submodules unless they contain a git directory Currently using "git rm" on a submodule - populated or not - fails with this error: fatal: git rm: '<submodule path>': Is a directory This made sense in the past as there was no way to remove a submodule without possibly removing unpushed parts of the submodule's history contained in its .git directory too, so erroring out here protected the user from possible loss of data. But submodules cloned with a recent git version do not contain the .git directory anymore, they use a gitfile to point to their git directory which is safely stored inside the superproject's .git directory. The work tree of these submodules can safely be removed without losing history, so let's teach git to do so. Using rm on an unpopulated submodule now removes the empty directory from the work tree and the gitlink from the index. If the submodule's directory is missing from the work tree, it will still be removed from the index. Using rm on a populated submodule using a gitfile will apply the usual checks for work tree modification adapted to submodules (unless forced). For a submodule that means that the HEAD is the same as recorded in the index, no tracked files are modified and no untracked files that aren't ignored are present in the submodules work tree (ignored files are deemed expendable and won't stop a submodule's work tree from being removed). That logic has to be applied in all nested submodules too. Using rm on a submodule which has its .git directory inside the work trees top level directory will just error out like it did before to protect the repository, even when forced. In the future git could either provide a message informing the user to convert the submodule to use a gitfile or even attempt to do the conversion itself, but that is not part of this change. Signed-off-by: Jens Lehmann <Jens.Lehmann@web.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2012-09-26 20:21:13 +02:00
GIT_WORK_TREE=. git config --unset core.worktree
) &&
test_must_fail git rm submod &&
test -d submod &&
test -d submod/subsubmod/.git &&
git status -s -uno --ignore-submodules=none > actual &&
! test -s actual &&
test_must_fail git rm -f submod &&
test -d submod &&
test -d submod/subsubmod/.git &&
git status -s -uno --ignore-submodules=none > actual &&
! test -s actual &&
rm -rf submod
'
test_expect_success 'checking out a commit after submodule removal needs manual updates' '
git commit -m "submodule removal" submod &&
git checkout HEAD^ &&
git submodule update &&
git checkout -q HEAD^ 2>actual &&
git checkout -q master 2>actual &&
test_i18ngrep "^warning: unable to rmdir submod:" actual &&
git status -s submod >actual &&
echo "?? submod/" >expected &&
test_cmp expected actual &&
rm -rf submod &&
git status -s -uno --ignore-submodules=none > actual &&
! test -s actual
'
test_expect_success 'rm of d/f when d has become a non-directory' '
rm -rf d &&
mkdir d &&
>d/f &&
git add d &&
rm -rf d &&
>d &&
git rm d/f &&
test_must_fail git rev-parse --verify :d/f &&
test_path_is_file d
'
test_expect_success SYMLINKS 'rm of d/f when d has become a dangling symlink' '
rm -rf d &&
mkdir d &&
>d/f &&
git add d &&
rm -rf d &&
ln -s nonexistent d &&
git rm d/f &&
test_must_fail git rev-parse --verify :d/f &&
test -h d &&
test_path_is_missing d
'
test_expect_success 'rm of file when it has become a directory' '
rm -rf d &&
>d &&
git add d &&
rm -f d &&
mkdir d &&
>d/f &&
test_must_fail git rm d &&
git rev-parse --verify :d &&
test_path_is_file d/f
'
t3600: document failure of rm across symbolic links If we have a symlink "d" that points to a directory, we should not be able to remove "d/f". In the normal case, where "d/f" does not exist in the index, we already disallow this, as we only remove things that git knows about in the index. So for something like: ln -s /outside/repo foo git add foo git rm foo/bar we will properly produce an error (as there is no index entry for foo/bar). However, if there is an index entry for the path (e.g., because the movement is due to working tree changes that have not yet been reflected in the index), we will happily delete it, even though the path we delete from the filesystem is not the same as the path in the index. This patch documents that failure with a test. While this is a bug, it should not be possible to cause serious data loss with it. For any path that does not have an index entry, we will complain and bail. For a path which does have an index entry, we will do the usual up-to-date content check. So even if the deleted path in the filesystem is not the same as the one we are removing from the index, we do know that they at least have the same content, and that the content is included in HEAD. That means the worst case is not the accidental loss of content, but rather confusion by the user when a copy of a file another part of the tree is removed. Which makes this bug a minor and hard-to-trigger annoyance rather than a data-loss bug (and hence the fix can be saved for a rainy day when somebody feels like working on it). Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2013-04-05 02:00:09 +02:00
test_expect_success SYMLINKS 'rm across a symlinked leading path (no index)' '
rm -rf d e &&
mkdir e &&
echo content >e/f &&
ln -s e d &&
git add -A e d &&
git commit -m "symlink d to e, e/f exists" &&
test_must_fail git rm d/f &&
git rev-parse --verify :d &&
git rev-parse --verify :e/f &&
test -h d &&
test_path_is_file e/f
'
test_expect_failure SYMLINKS 'rm across a symlinked leading path (w/ index)' '
rm -rf d e &&
mkdir d &&
echo content >d/f &&
git add -A e d &&
git commit -m "d/f exists" &&
mv d e &&
ln -s e d &&
test_must_fail git rm d/f &&
git rev-parse --verify :d/f &&
test -h d &&
test_path_is_file e/f
'
test_expect_success 'setup for testing rm messages' '
>bar.txt &&
>foo.txt &&
git add bar.txt foo.txt
'
test_expect_success 'rm files with different staged content' '
cat >expect <<-\EOF &&
error: the following files have staged content different from both the
file and the HEAD:
bar.txt
foo.txt
(use -f to force removal)
EOF
echo content1 >foo.txt &&
echo content1 >bar.txt &&
test_must_fail git rm foo.txt bar.txt 2>actual &&
test_i18ncmp expect actual
'
test_expect_success 'rm files with different staged content without hints' '
cat >expect <<-\EOF &&
error: the following files have staged content different from both the
file and the HEAD:
bar.txt
foo.txt
EOF
echo content2 >foo.txt &&
echo content2 >bar.txt &&
test_must_fail git -c advice.rmhints=false rm foo.txt bar.txt 2>actual &&
test_i18ncmp expect actual
'
test_expect_success 'rm file with local modification' '
cat >expect <<-\EOF &&
error: the following file has local modifications:
foo.txt
(use --cached to keep the file, or -f to force removal)
EOF
git commit -m "testing rm 3" &&
echo content3 >foo.txt &&
test_must_fail git rm foo.txt 2>actual &&
test_i18ncmp expect actual
'
test_expect_success 'rm file with local modification without hints' '
cat >expect <<-\EOF &&
error: the following file has local modifications:
bar.txt
EOF
echo content4 >bar.txt &&
test_must_fail git -c advice.rmhints=false rm bar.txt 2>actual &&
test_i18ncmp expect actual
'
test_expect_success 'rm file with changes in the index' '
cat >expect <<-\EOF &&
error: the following file has changes staged in the index:
foo.txt
(use --cached to keep the file, or -f to force removal)
EOF
git reset --hard &&
echo content5 >foo.txt &&
git add foo.txt &&
test_must_fail git rm foo.txt 2>actual &&
test_i18ncmp expect actual
'
test_expect_success 'rm file with changes in the index without hints' '
cat >expect <<-\EOF &&
error: the following file has changes staged in the index:
foo.txt
EOF
test_must_fail git -c advice.rmhints=false rm foo.txt 2>actual &&
test_i18ncmp expect actual
'
test_expect_success 'rm files with two different errors' '
cat >expect <<-\EOF &&
error: the following file has staged content different from both the
file and the HEAD:
foo1.txt
(use -f to force removal)
error: the following file has changes staged in the index:
bar1.txt
(use --cached to keep the file, or -f to force removal)
EOF
echo content >foo1.txt &&
git add foo1.txt &&
echo content6 >foo1.txt &&
echo content6 >bar1.txt &&
git add bar1.txt &&
test_must_fail git rm bar1.txt foo1.txt 2>actual &&
test_i18ncmp expect actual
'
test_done