1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/git/git.git synced 2024-11-05 16:52:59 +01:00
Commit graph

5 commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Elijah Newren
86273e5764 merge-recursive: D/F conflicts where was_a_dir/file -> was_a_dir
In merge-recursive.c, whenever there was a rename where a file name on one
side of the rename matches a directory name on the other side of the merge,
then the very first check that

  string_list_has_string(&o->current_directory_set, ren1_dst)

would trigger forcing it into marking it as a rename/directory conflict.

However, if the path is only renamed on one side and a simple three-way
merge between the separate files resolves cleanly, then we don't need to
mark it as a rename/directory conflict.  So, we can simply move the check
for rename/directory conflicts after we've verified that there isn't a
rename/rename conflict and that a threeway content merge doesn't work.

This changes the particular error message one gets in the case where the
directory name that a file on one side of the rename matches is not also
part of the rename pair.  For example, with commits containing the files:

  COMMON    -> (HEAD,           MERGE )
  ---------    ---------------  -------
  sub/file1 -> (sub/file1,      newsub)
  <NULL>    -> (newsub/newfile, <NULL>)

then previously when one tried to merge MERGE into HEAD, one would get

  CONFLICT (rename/directory): Rename sub/file1->newsub in HEAD directory newsub added in merge
  Renaming sub/file1 to newsub~HEAD instead
  Adding newsub/newfile
  Automatic merge failed; fix conflicts and then commit the result.
After this patch, the error message will instead become:
  Removing newsub
  Adding newsub/newfile
  CONFLICT (file/directory): There is a directory with name newsub in merge. Adding newsub as newsub~HEAD
  Automatic merge failed; fix conflicts and then commit the result.

That makes more sense to me, because git can't know that there's a conflict
until after it's tried resolving paths involving newsub/newfile to see if
they are still in the way at the end (and if newsub/newfile is not in the
way at the end, there should be no conflict at all, which did not hold with
git previously).

Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2010-09-09 17:03:02 -07:00
Elijah Newren
56bfd762e5 t3509: Add rename + D/F conflict testcase that recursive strategy fails
When one side of a file rename matches a directory name on the other side,
the recursive merge strategy will fail.  This is true even if the merge is
trivially resolvable.

Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2010-09-09 17:01:32 -07:00
Elijah Newren
dd5685818b Mark tests that use symlinks as needing SYMLINKS prerequisite
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2010-08-12 21:38:39 -07:00
Elijah Newren
5a2580d62f merge_recursive: Fix renames across paths below D/F conflicts
The rename logic in process_renames() handles renames and merging of file
contents and then marks files as processed.  However, there may be higher
stage entries left in the index for other reasons (e.g., due to D/F
conflicts).  By checking for such cases and marking the entry as not
processed, it allows process_entry() later to look at it and handle those
higher stages.

Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2010-07-09 16:13:00 -07:00
Alexander Gladysh
f433f70547 Add a rename + D/F conflict testcase
This is a simple testcase where both sides of the rename are paths involved
in (separate) D/F merge conflicts

Signed-off-by: Alexander Gladysh <agladysh@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2010-07-09 16:11:13 -07:00