AIX doesn't make a distiction between EEXIST and ENOTEMPTY; relying
on the strerror string for the rmdir failure is fragile. Just test
that the start of the string matches the Git controlled "failed to
rmdir..." error. The exact text of the OS generated error string
isn't important to the test.
Signed-off-by: Charles Bailey <cbailey32@bloomberg.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The "Submodules" section of the "git rm" documentation mentions what will
happen when a submodule with a gitfile gets removed with newer git. But it
doesn't talk about what happens when the user changes between commits
before and after the removal, which does not remove the submodule from the
work tree like using the rm command did the first time.
Explain what happens and what the user has to do manually to fix that in
the new BUGS section. Also document this behavior in a new test.
Signed-off-by: Jens Lehmann <Jens.Lehmann@web.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The test 'choking "git rm" should not let it die with cruft' is
supposed to check 'git rm's behavior when interrupted by provoking a
SIGPIPE while 'git rm' is busily deleting files from a specially
crafted index.
This test is silently broken for the following reasons:
- The test crafts a special index by feeding a large number of index
entries with null shas to 'git update-index --index-info'. It was
OK back then when this test was introduced in commit 0693f9ddad
(Make sure lockfiles are unlocked when dying on SIGPIPE,
2008-12-18), but since commit 4337b5856f (do not write null sha1s to
on-disk index, 2012-07-28) null shas are not allowed in the on-disk
index causing 'git update-index' to error out.
- The barfing 'git update-index --index-info' should fail the test,
but it remains unnoticed because of the severely broken && chain:
the test's result depends solely on whether there is a stale lock
file left behind, but after 'git update-index' errors out 'git rm'
won't be executed at all.
To fix this test feed only non-null shas to 'git update-index' and
restore the && chain (partly by adding a missing && and by using the
test_when_finished helper instead of manual cleanup).
Signed-off-by: SZEDER Gábor <szeder@ira.uka.de>
Reviewed-by: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
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>
Introduce advice.rmHints to choose whether to display advice or not
when git rm fails. Defaults to true, in order to preserve current behavior.
As an example, the message:
error: 'foo.txt' has changes staged in the index
(use --cached to keep the file, or -f to force removal)
would look like, with advice.rmHints=false:
error: 'foo.txt' has changes staged in the index
Signed-off-by: Mathieu Lienard--Mayor <Mathieu.Lienard--Mayor@ensimag.imag.fr>
Signed-off-by: Jorge Juan Garcia Garcia <Jorge-Juan.Garcia-Garcia@ensimag.imag.fr>
Signed-off-by: Matthieu Moy <Matthieu.Moy@grenoble-inp.fr>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
When 'git rm' fails, it now displays a single message
with the list of files involved, instead of displaying
a list of messages with one file each.
As an example, the old message:
error: 'foo.txt' has changes staged in the index
(use --cached to keep the file, or -f to force removal)
error: 'bar.txt' has changes staged in the index
(use --cached to keep the file, or -f to force removal)
would now be displayed as:
error: the following files have changes staged in the index:
foo.txt
bar.txt
(use --cached to keep the file, or -f to force removal)
Signed-off-by: Mathieu Lienard--Mayor <Mathieu.Lienard--Mayor@ensimag.imag.fr>
Signed-off-by: Jorge Juan Garcia Garcia <Jorge-Juan.Garcia-Garcia@ensimag.imag.fr>
Signed-off-by: Matthieu Moy <Matthieu.Moy@grenoble-inp.fr>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
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>
The previous commit taught "rm" that it is safe to consider
"d/f" removed when "d" has become a non-directory. This
patch adds a test for the opposite: a file "d" that becomes
a directory.
In this case, "git rm" does need to complain, because we
should not be removing arbitrary content under "d". Git
already behaves correctly, but let's make sure that remains
the case by protecting the behavior with a test.
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
If we used to have an index entry "d/f", but "d" has been
replaced by a non-directory entry, the user may still want
to run "git rm" to delete the stale index entry. They could
use "git rm --cached" to just touch the index, but "git rm"
should also work: we explicitly try to handle the case that
the file has already been removed from the working tree.
However, because unlinking "d/f" in this case will not yield
ENOENT, but rather ENOTDIR, we do not notice that the file
is already gone. Instead, we report it as an error.
The simple solution is to treat ENOTDIR in this case exactly
like ENOENT; all we want to know is whether the file is
already gone, and if a leading path is no longer a
directory, then by definition the sub-path is gone.
Reported-by: jpinheiro <7jpinheiro@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
With d4a7ffa (tests: "cp -a" is a GNUism, 2012-10-08), we got rid of
most of them, but the ones in a topic that was still in flight were
missed.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Doing a "git rm submod/" on a submodule results in an error:
fatal: pathspec 'submod/' did not match any files
This is really inconvenient as e.g. using TAB completion in a shell on a
submodule automatically adds the trailing '/' when it completes the path
of the submodule directory. The user has then to remove the '/' herself to
make a "git rm" succeed. Doing a "git rm -r somedir/" is working fine, so
there is no reason why that shouldn't work for submodules too.
Teach git rm to not error out when a '/' is appended to the path of a
submodule. Achieve this by chopping off trailing slashes from the path
names given if they represent directories. Add tests to make sure that
logic only applies to directories and not to files.
Signed-off-by: Jens Lehmann <Jens.Lehmann@web.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
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>
* jc/fix-diff-files-unmerged:
diff-files: show unmerged entries correctly
diff: remove often unused parameters from diff_unmerge()
diff.c: return filepair from diff_unmerge()
test: use $_z40 from test-lib
There is no need to duplicate the definition of $_z40 and $_x40 that
test-lib.sh supplies the test scripts.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Commit c91cfd19 (tests: A SANITY test prereq for testing if we're
root, 2010-08-06) introduced a SANITY prerequisite which had very
similar semantics to RO_DIR. That commit removed the code to set
RO_DIR, but forgot to replace RO_DIR with SANITY in test #15.
In order not to skip test 15 unnecessarily, since RO_DIR will never
be set, we pass the SANITY prerequisite instead.
Signed-off-by: Ramsay Jones <ramsay@ramsay1.demon.co.uk>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Some tests depend on not being able to write to files after chmod
-w. This doesn't work when running the tests as root.
Change test-lib.sh to test if this works, and if so it sets a new
SANITY test prerequisite. The tests that use this previously failed
when run under root.
There was already a test for this in t3600-rm.sh, added by Junio C
Hamano in 2283645 in 2006. That check now uses the new SANITY
prerequisite.
Some of this was resurrected from the "Tests in Cygwin" thread in May
2009:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/116729/focus=118385
Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
SKIP messages are now part of the TAP plan. A TAP harness now knows
why a particular test was skipped and can report that information. The
non-TAP harness built into Git's test-lib did nothing special with
these messages, and is unaffected by these changes.
Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
If we remove a path in a/deep/subdirectory, we should try to
remove as many trailing components as possible (i.e.,
subdirectory, then deep, then a). However, the test for the
return value of rmdir was reversed, so we only ever deleted
at most one level.
The fix is in remove_path, so "apply" and "merge-recursive"
also are fixed.
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
There are two prerequisites:
- The filesystem supports names with tabs or new-lines.
- Files cannot be removed if their containing directory is read-only.
Previously, whether these preconditions are satisified was tested inside
test_expect_success. We move these tests outside because, strictly
speaking, they are not part of the tests.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Sixt <j6t@kdbg.org>
There were some uses of 'say' inside test_expect_success. But if the tests
were not run in verbose mode, this message went to /dev/null. Pull them out
of test_expect_success.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Sixt <j6t@kdbg.org>
Some tests report that some tests will be skipped. They used
'test_expect_success' with a trivially successful test. Nowadays we have
the helper function 'say' for this purpose.
In on case, 'say_color skip' is replaced by 'say' because the former is
not intended as a public API.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Sixt <j6t@kdbg.org>
We cleaned up lockfiles upon receiving the usual suspects HUP, TERM, QUIT
but a wicked user could kill us of asphyxiation by piping our output to a
pipe that does not read. Protect ourselves by catching SIGPIPE and clean
up the lockfiles as well in such a case.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
This uses the extended index flag mechanism introduced earlier to mark
the entries added to the index via "git add -N" with CE_INTENT_TO_ADD.
The logic to detect an "intent to add" entry for the purpose of allowing
"git rm --cached $path" is tightened to check not just for a staged empty
blob, but with the CE_INTENT_TO_ADD bit. This protects an empty blob that
was explicitly added and then modified in the work tree from being dropped
with this sequence:
$ >empty
$ git add empty
$ echo "non empty" >empty
$ git rm --cached empty
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
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>
Since "git rm" is supposed to be porcelain, we should convince it to
be user friendly by refreshing the index itself.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
* maint:
GIT 1.5.6.4
builtin-rm: fix index lock file path
http-fetch: do not SEGV after fetching a bad pack idx file
rev-list: honor --quiet option
api-run-command.txt: typofix
When hold_locked_index() is called with a relative git_dir and you are
outside the work tree, the lock file become relative to the current
directory. So when later setup_work_tree() change the current directory
it breaks lock file path and commit_locked_index() fails.
This patch move index locking code after setup_work_tree() call to make
lock file relative to the working tree as it should be and add a test
case.
Noticed by Nick Andrew.
Signed-off-by: Olivier Marin <dkr@freesurf.fr>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
This patch changes every occurrence of "! git" -- with the meaning
that a git call has to gracefully fail -- into "test_must_fail git".
This is useful to
- make sure the test does not fail because of a signal,
e.g. SIGSEGV, and
- advertise the use of "test_must_fail" for new tests.
Signed-off-by: Stephan Beyer <s-beyer@gmx.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Originally, test_expect_failure was designed to be the opposite
of test_expect_success, but this was a bad decision. Most tests
run a series of commands that leads to the single command that
needs to be tested, like this:
test_expect_{success,failure} 'test title' '
setup1 &&
setup2 &&
setup3 &&
what is to be tested
'
And expecting a failure exit from the whole sequence misses the
point of writing tests. Your setup$N that are supposed to
succeed may have failed without even reaching what you are
trying to test. The only valid use of test_expect_failure is to
check a trivial single command that is expected to fail, which
is a minority in tests of Porcelain-ish commands.
This large-ish patch rewrites all uses of test_expect_failure to
use test_expect_success and rewrites the condition of what is
tested, like this:
test_expect_success 'test title' '
setup1 &&
setup2 &&
setup3 &&
! this command should fail
'
test_expect_failure is redefined to serve as a reminder that
that test *should* succeed but due to a known breakage in git it
currently does not pass. So if git-foo command should create a
file 'bar' but you discovered a bug that it doesn't, you can
write a test like this:
test_expect_failure 'git-foo should create bar' '
rm -f bar &&
git foo &&
test -f bar
'
This construct acts similar to test_expect_success, but instead
of reporting "ok/FAIL" like test_expect_success does, the
outcome is reported as "FIXED/still broken".
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
There is nothing _wrong_ with egrep per se, but this way we
would have less dependency on external tools.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
In the previous behavior, "git-rm --cached" (without -f) had the same
restriction as "git-rm". This forced the user to use the -f flag in
situations which weren't actually dangerous, like:
$ git add foo # oops, I didn't want this
$ git rm --cached foo # back to initial situation
Previously, the index had to match the file *and* the HEAD. With
--cached, the index must now match the file *or* the HEAD. The behavior
without --cached is unchanged, but provides better error messages.
Signed-off-by: Matthieu Moy <Matthieu.Moy@imag.fr>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Moved the setup commands into test_expect_success blocks so their
output is hidden unless -v is used. This makes the test suite look
a little cleaner when the rm test-file setup step fails (and was
expected to fail for most cases).
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
When running t3600-rm test under fakeroot (or as root), we
cannot make a file unremovable with "chmod a-w .". Detect this
case early and skip that test.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
New tests are added to the git-rm test case to cover this as well.
Signed-off-by: Carl Worth <cworth@cworth.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
This adds a git-rm command which provides convenience similar to
git-add, (and a bit more since it takes care of the rm as well if
given -f).
Like git-add, git-rm expands the given path names through
git-ls-files. This means it only acts on files listed in the
index. And it does act recursively on directories by default, (no -r
needed as in the case of rm itself). When it recurses, it does not
remove empty directories that are left behind.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
