This is a testcase that was broken by b2c8c0a (merge-recursive: When we
detect we can skip an update, actually skip it 2011-02-28) and fixed by
6db4105 (Revert "Merge branch 'en/merge-recursive'" 2011-05-19). Include
this testcase to ensure we don't regress it again.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
This testcase was part of en/merge-recursive that was reverted in 6db4105
(Revert "Merge branch 'en/merge-recursive'" 2011-05-19). While the other
changes in that series caused unfortunate breakage, this testcase is still
useful; reinstate it.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Since this test later does a git add -A, we should clean out unnecessary
untracked files as part of our cleanup.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
This is another challenging testcase trying to exercise the virtual merge
base creation in the rename/rename(1to2) code. A testcase is added that
we should be able to merge cleanly, but which requires a virtual merge
base to be created that is aware of rename/rename(1to2)/add-source
conflicts and can handle those.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
This test is mostly just designed for testing optimality of the virtual
merge base in the event of a rename/rename(1to2) conflict. The current
choice for resolving this in git seems somewhat confusing and suboptimal.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Add testcases that cover three failures with current git merge, all
involving renaming one file on both sides of history:
Case 1:
If a single file is renamed to two different filenames on different sides
of history, there should be a conflict. Adding a new file on one of those
sides of history whose name happens to match the rename source should not
cause the merge to suddenly succeed.
Case 2:
If a single file is renamed on both sides of history but renamed
identically, there should not be a conflict. This works fine. However,
if one of those sides also added a new file that happened to match the
rename source, then that file should be left alone. Currently, the
rename/rename conflict handling causes that new file to become untracked.
Case 3:
If a single file is renamed to two different filenames on different sides
of history, there should be a conflict. This works currently. However,
if those renames also involve rename/add conflicts (i.e. there are new
files on one side of history that match the destination of the rename of
the other side of history), then the resulting conflict should be recorded
in the index, showing that there were multiple files with a given filename.
Currently, git silently discards one of file versions.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
rename/rename conflicts, both with one file being renamed to two different
files and with two files being renamed to the same file, should leave the
index and the working copy in a sane state with appropriate conflict
recording, auxiliary files, etc. Git seems to handle one of the two cases
alright, but has some problems with the two files being renamed to one
case. Add tests for both cases.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Add testcases that cover a variety of merge issues with files being
renamed and modified on different sides of history, when there are
directories possibly conflicting with the rename location.
Case 1:
On one side of history, a file is modified and a new directory is added.
On the other side of history, the file is modified in a non-conflicting
way but is renamed to the location of the new directory.
Case 2:
[Same as case 1, but there is also a content conflict. In detail:]
On one side of history, a file is modified and a new directory is added.
On the other side of history, the file is modified in a conflicting way
and it is renamed to the location of the new directory.
Case 3:
[Similar to case 1, but the "conflicting" directory is the directory
where the file original resided. In detail:]
On one side of history, a file is modified. On the other side of history,
the file is modified in a non-conflicting way, but the directory it was
under is removed and the file is renamed to the location of the directory
it used to reside in (i.e. 'sub/file' gets renamed to 'sub'). This is
flagged as a directory/rename conflict, but should be able to be resolved
since the directory can be cleanly removed by the merge.
One branch renames a file and makes a file where the directory the renamed
file used to be in, and the other branch updates the file in
place. Merging them should resolve it cleanly as long as the content level
change on the branches do not overlap and rename is detected, or should
leave conflict without losing information.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
There are cases where history should merge cleanly, and which current git
does merge cleanly despite not detecting a rename; however the merge
currently nukes files that should not be removed.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
An undetected rename can cause a silent success where a conflict should
have been detected, or can cause an erroneous conflict state where the
merge should have been resolvable. Add testcases for both.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
If there is a cleanly resolvable rename/modify conflict AND there is a new
file introduced on the renamed side of the merge whose name happens to
match that of the source of the rename (but is otherwise unrelated to the
rename), then git fails to cleanly resolve the merge despite the fact that
the new file should not cause any problems.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Current git will nuke an untracked file during a rename/delete conflict if
(a) there is an untracked file whose name matches the source of a rename
and (b) the merge is done in a certain direction. Add a simple testcase
demonstrating this bug.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
* jk/maint-config-alias-fix:
handle_options(): do not miscount how many arguments were used
config: always parse GIT_CONFIG_PARAMETERS during git_config
git_config: don't peek at global config_parameters
config: make environment parsing routines static
* ab/i18n-fixup: (24 commits)
i18n: use test_i18n{cmp,grep} in t7600, t7607, t7611 and t7811
i18n: use test_i18n{grep,cmp} in t7508
i18n: use test_i18ngrep in t7506
i18n: use test_i18ngrep and test_i18ncmp in t7502
i18n: use test_i18ngrep in t7501
i18n: use test_i18ncmp in t7500
i18n: use test_i18ngrep in t7201
i18n: use test_i18ncmp and test_i18ngrep in t7102 and t7110
i18n: use test_i18ncmp and test_i18ngrep in t5541, t6040, t6120, t7004, t7012 and t7060
i18n: use test_i18ncmp and test_i18ngrep in t3700, t4001 and t4014
i18n: use test_i18ncmp and test_i18ngrep in t3203, t3501 and t3507
i18n: use test_i18ngrep in t2020, t2204, t3030, and t3200
i18n: use test_i18ngrep in lib-httpd and t2019
i18n: do not overuse C_LOCALE_OUTPUT (grep)
i18n: use test_i18ncmp in t1200 and t2200
i18n: .git file is not a human readable message (t5601)
i18n: do not overuse C_LOCALE_OUTPUT
i18n: mark init-db messages for translation
i18n: mark checkout plural warning for translation
i18n: mark checkout --detach messages for translation
...
* jc/rename-degrade-cc-to-c:
diffcore-rename: fall back to -C when -C -C busts the rename limit
diffcore-rename: record filepair for rename src
diffcore-rename: refactor "too many candidates" logic
builtin/diff.c: remove duplicated call to diff_result_code()
* jk/git-connection-deadlock-fix:
test core.gitproxy configuration
send-pack: avoid deadlock on git:// push with failed pack-objects
connect: let callers know if connection is a socket
connect: treat generic proxy processes like ssh processes
Conflicts:
connect.c
The handle_options() function advances the base of the argument array and
returns the number of arguments it used. The caller in handle_alias()
wants to reallocate the argv array it passes to this function, and
attempts to do so by subtracting the returned value to compensate for the
change handle_options() makes to the new_argv.
But handle_options() did not correctly count when "-c <config=value>" is
given, causing a wrong pointer to be passed to realloc().
Fix it by saving the original argv at the beginning of handle_options(),
and return the difference between the final value of argv, which will
relieve the places that move the array pointer from the additional burden
of keeping track of "handled" counter.
Noticed-by: Kazuki Tsujimoto
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Previously we parsed GIT_CONFIG_PARAMETERS lazily into a
linked list, and then checked that list during future
invocations of git_config. However, that ignores the fact
that the environment variable could change during our run
(e.g., because we parse more "-c" as part of an alias).
Instead, let's just re-parse the environment variable each
time. It's generally not very big, and it's no more work
than parsing the config files, anyway.
As a bonus, we can ditch all of the linked list storage code
entirely, making the code much simpler.
The test unfortunately still does not pass because of an
unrelated bug in handle_options.
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
With diff.suppress-blank-empty=true, "git diff --word-diff" would
output data that had been read from uninitialized heap memory.
The problem was that fn_out_consume did not account for the
possibility of a line with length 1, i.e., the empty context line
that diff.suppress-blank-empty=true converts from " \n" to "\n".
Since it assumed there would always be a prefix character (the space),
it decremented "len" unconditionally, thus passing len=0 to emit_line,
which would then blindly call emit_line_0 with len=-1 which would
pass that value on to fwrite as SIZE_MAX. Boom.
Signed-off-by: Jim Meyering <meyering@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
git svn log --show-commit had no tests and, consequently, no attention
by the author of
b1b4755 (git-log: put space after commit mark, 2011-03-10)
who kept git svn log working only without --show-commit.
Introduce a test and fix it.
Reported-by: Bernt Hansen <bernt@norang.ca>
Signed-off-by: Michael J Gruber <git@drmicha.warpmail.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
This is just a basic sanity test to see whether
core.gitproxy works at all. Until now, we were not testing
anywhere.
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
* jc/maint-add-p-overlapping-hunks:
t3701: add-p-fix makes the last test to pass
"add -p": work-around an old laziness that does not coalesce hunks
add--interactive.perl: factor out repeated --recount option
t3701: Editing a split hunk in an "add -p" session
add -p: 'q' should really quit
We already tested cherry-picking a root commit, but only
with the internal merge-recursive strategy. Let's also test
the recently-allowed reverting of a root commit, as well as
testing with external strategies (which until recently
triggered a segfault).
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
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
Update the fix for 1.7.5 maintenance track.
* jc/maint-1.7.4-pathspec-stdin-and-cmdline:
setup_revisions(): take pathspec from command line and --stdin correctly
Update the fix for 1.7.4 maintenance track.
* jc/maint-1.6.6-pathspec-stdin-and-cmdline:
setup_revisions(): take pathspec from command line and --stdin correctly
When the command line has "--" disambiguator, we take the remainder of
argv[] as "prune_data", but when --stdin is given at the same time,
we need to append to the existing prune_data and end up attempting to
realloc(3) it. That would not work.
Fix it by consistently using append_prune_data() throughout the input
processing. Also avoid counting the number of existing paths in the
function over and over again.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Kacper Kornet noticed that a $variable in "word" in the above construct is
not substituted by his pdksh. Modern POSIX compliant shells (e.g. dash,
ksh, bash) all seem to interpret POSIX "2.6.2 Parameter Expansion" that
says "word shall be subjected to tilde expansion, parameter expansion,
command substitution, and arithmetic expansion" in ${parameter<op>word},
to mean that the word is expanded as if it appeared in dq pairs, so if the
word were "'$variable'" (sans dq) it would expand to a single quote, the
value of the $variable and then a single quote.
Johannes Sixt reports that the behavior of quoting at the right of :- when
the ${...:-...} expansion appears in double-quotes was debated recently at
length at the Austin group. We can avoid this issue and future-proof the
test by a slight rewrite.
Helped-by: Johannes Sixt <j.sixt@viscovery.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The parsing of the additional command line parameters supplied to
the branch.<name>.mergeoptions configuration variable was implemented
at the wrong stage. If any merge-related variable came after we read
branch.<name>.mergeoptions, the earlier value was overwritten.
We should first read all the merge.* configuration, override them by
reading from branch.<name>.mergeoptions and then finally read from
the command line.
This patch should fix it, even though I now strongly suspect that
branch.<name>.mergeoptions that gives a single command line that
needs to be parsed was likely to be an ill-conceived idea to begin
with. Sigh...
Helped-by: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
