git/t/t6134-pathspec-in-submodule.sh

34 lines
813 B
Bash
Raw Normal View History

pathspec: give better message for submodule related pathspec error Every once in a while someone complains to the mailing list to have run into this weird assertion[1]. The usual response from the mailing list is link to old discussions[2], and acknowledging the problem stating it is known. This patch accomplishes two things: 1. Switch assert() to die("BUG") to give a more readable message. 2. Take one of the cases where we hit a BUG and turn it into a normal "there was something wrong with the input" message. This assertion triggered for cases where there wasn't a programming bug, but just bogus input. In particular, if the user asks for a pathspec that is inside a submodule, we shouldn't assert() or die("BUG"); we should tell the user their request is bogus. The only reason we did not check for it, is the expensive nature of such a check, so callers avoid setting the flag PATHSPEC_STRIP_SUBMODULE_SLASH_EXPENSIVE. However when we die due to bogus input, the expense of CPU cycles spent outweighs the user wondering what went wrong, so run that check unconditionally before dying with a more generic error message. Note: There is a case (e.g. "git -C submodule add .") in which we call strip_submodule_slash_expensive, as git-add requests it via the flag PATHSPEC_STRIP_SUBMODULE_SLASH_EXPENSIVE, but the assert used to trigger nevertheless, because the flag PATHSPEC_LITERAL was not set, such that we executed if (item->nowildcard_len < prefixlen) item->nowildcard_len = prefixlen; and prefixlen was not adapted (e.g. it was computed from "submodule/") So in the die_inside_submodule_path function we also need handle paths, that were stripped before, i.e. are the exact submodule path. This is why the conditions in die_inside_submodule_path are slightly different than in strip_submodule_slash_expensive. [1] https://www.google.com/search?q=item-%3Enowildcard_len [2] http://git.661346.n2.nabble.com/assert-failed-in-submodule-edge-case-td7628687.html https://www.spinics.net/lists/git/msg249473.html Helped-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> Helped-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2017-01-09 23:16:50 +00:00
#!/bin/sh
test_description='test case exclude pathspec'
TEST_PASSES_SANITIZE_LEAK=true
pathspec: give better message for submodule related pathspec error Every once in a while someone complains to the mailing list to have run into this weird assertion[1]. The usual response from the mailing list is link to old discussions[2], and acknowledging the problem stating it is known. This patch accomplishes two things: 1. Switch assert() to die("BUG") to give a more readable message. 2. Take one of the cases where we hit a BUG and turn it into a normal "there was something wrong with the input" message. This assertion triggered for cases where there wasn't a programming bug, but just bogus input. In particular, if the user asks for a pathspec that is inside a submodule, we shouldn't assert() or die("BUG"); we should tell the user their request is bogus. The only reason we did not check for it, is the expensive nature of such a check, so callers avoid setting the flag PATHSPEC_STRIP_SUBMODULE_SLASH_EXPENSIVE. However when we die due to bogus input, the expense of CPU cycles spent outweighs the user wondering what went wrong, so run that check unconditionally before dying with a more generic error message. Note: There is a case (e.g. "git -C submodule add .") in which we call strip_submodule_slash_expensive, as git-add requests it via the flag PATHSPEC_STRIP_SUBMODULE_SLASH_EXPENSIVE, but the assert used to trigger nevertheless, because the flag PATHSPEC_LITERAL was not set, such that we executed if (item->nowildcard_len < prefixlen) item->nowildcard_len = prefixlen; and prefixlen was not adapted (e.g. it was computed from "submodule/") So in the die_inside_submodule_path function we also need handle paths, that were stripped before, i.e. are the exact submodule path. This is why the conditions in die_inside_submodule_path are slightly different than in strip_submodule_slash_expensive. [1] https://www.google.com/search?q=item-%3Enowildcard_len [2] http://git.661346.n2.nabble.com/assert-failed-in-submodule-edge-case-td7628687.html https://www.spinics.net/lists/git/msg249473.html Helped-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> Helped-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2017-01-09 23:16:50 +00:00
. ./test-lib.sh
test_expect_success 'setup a submodule' '
test_create_repo pretzel &&
: >pretzel/a &&
git -C pretzel add a &&
git -C pretzel commit -m "add a file" -- a &&
git -c protocol.file.allow=always submodule add ./pretzel sub &&
pathspec: give better message for submodule related pathspec error Every once in a while someone complains to the mailing list to have run into this weird assertion[1]. The usual response from the mailing list is link to old discussions[2], and acknowledging the problem stating it is known. This patch accomplishes two things: 1. Switch assert() to die("BUG") to give a more readable message. 2. Take one of the cases where we hit a BUG and turn it into a normal "there was something wrong with the input" message. This assertion triggered for cases where there wasn't a programming bug, but just bogus input. In particular, if the user asks for a pathspec that is inside a submodule, we shouldn't assert() or die("BUG"); we should tell the user their request is bogus. The only reason we did not check for it, is the expensive nature of such a check, so callers avoid setting the flag PATHSPEC_STRIP_SUBMODULE_SLASH_EXPENSIVE. However when we die due to bogus input, the expense of CPU cycles spent outweighs the user wondering what went wrong, so run that check unconditionally before dying with a more generic error message. Note: There is a case (e.g. "git -C submodule add .") in which we call strip_submodule_slash_expensive, as git-add requests it via the flag PATHSPEC_STRIP_SUBMODULE_SLASH_EXPENSIVE, but the assert used to trigger nevertheless, because the flag PATHSPEC_LITERAL was not set, such that we executed if (item->nowildcard_len < prefixlen) item->nowildcard_len = prefixlen; and prefixlen was not adapted (e.g. it was computed from "submodule/") So in the die_inside_submodule_path function we also need handle paths, that were stripped before, i.e. are the exact submodule path. This is why the conditions in die_inside_submodule_path are slightly different than in strip_submodule_slash_expensive. [1] https://www.google.com/search?q=item-%3Enowildcard_len [2] http://git.661346.n2.nabble.com/assert-failed-in-submodule-edge-case-td7628687.html https://www.spinics.net/lists/git/msg249473.html Helped-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> Helped-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2017-01-09 23:16:50 +00:00
git commit -a -m "add submodule" &&
git submodule deinit --all
'
cat <<EOF >expect
fatal: Pathspec 'sub/a' is in submodule 'sub'
EOF
test_expect_success 'error message for path inside submodule' '
echo a >sub/a &&
test_must_fail git add sub/a 2>actual &&
test_cmp expect actual
pathspec: give better message for submodule related pathspec error Every once in a while someone complains to the mailing list to have run into this weird assertion[1]. The usual response from the mailing list is link to old discussions[2], and acknowledging the problem stating it is known. This patch accomplishes two things: 1. Switch assert() to die("BUG") to give a more readable message. 2. Take one of the cases where we hit a BUG and turn it into a normal "there was something wrong with the input" message. This assertion triggered for cases where there wasn't a programming bug, but just bogus input. In particular, if the user asks for a pathspec that is inside a submodule, we shouldn't assert() or die("BUG"); we should tell the user their request is bogus. The only reason we did not check for it, is the expensive nature of such a check, so callers avoid setting the flag PATHSPEC_STRIP_SUBMODULE_SLASH_EXPENSIVE. However when we die due to bogus input, the expense of CPU cycles spent outweighs the user wondering what went wrong, so run that check unconditionally before dying with a more generic error message. Note: There is a case (e.g. "git -C submodule add .") in which we call strip_submodule_slash_expensive, as git-add requests it via the flag PATHSPEC_STRIP_SUBMODULE_SLASH_EXPENSIVE, but the assert used to trigger nevertheless, because the flag PATHSPEC_LITERAL was not set, such that we executed if (item->nowildcard_len < prefixlen) item->nowildcard_len = prefixlen; and prefixlen was not adapted (e.g. it was computed from "submodule/") So in the die_inside_submodule_path function we also need handle paths, that were stripped before, i.e. are the exact submodule path. This is why the conditions in die_inside_submodule_path are slightly different than in strip_submodule_slash_expensive. [1] https://www.google.com/search?q=item-%3Enowildcard_len [2] http://git.661346.n2.nabble.com/assert-failed-in-submodule-edge-case-td7628687.html https://www.spinics.net/lists/git/msg249473.html Helped-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> Helped-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2017-01-09 23:16:50 +00:00
'
test_expect_success 'error message for path inside submodule from within submodule' '
test_must_fail git -C sub add . 2>actual &&
test_i18ngrep "in unpopulated submodule" actual
pathspec: give better message for submodule related pathspec error Every once in a while someone complains to the mailing list to have run into this weird assertion[1]. The usual response from the mailing list is link to old discussions[2], and acknowledging the problem stating it is known. This patch accomplishes two things: 1. Switch assert() to die("BUG") to give a more readable message. 2. Take one of the cases where we hit a BUG and turn it into a normal "there was something wrong with the input" message. This assertion triggered for cases where there wasn't a programming bug, but just bogus input. In particular, if the user asks for a pathspec that is inside a submodule, we shouldn't assert() or die("BUG"); we should tell the user their request is bogus. The only reason we did not check for it, is the expensive nature of such a check, so callers avoid setting the flag PATHSPEC_STRIP_SUBMODULE_SLASH_EXPENSIVE. However when we die due to bogus input, the expense of CPU cycles spent outweighs the user wondering what went wrong, so run that check unconditionally before dying with a more generic error message. Note: There is a case (e.g. "git -C submodule add .") in which we call strip_submodule_slash_expensive, as git-add requests it via the flag PATHSPEC_STRIP_SUBMODULE_SLASH_EXPENSIVE, but the assert used to trigger nevertheless, because the flag PATHSPEC_LITERAL was not set, such that we executed if (item->nowildcard_len < prefixlen) item->nowildcard_len = prefixlen; and prefixlen was not adapted (e.g. it was computed from "submodule/") So in the die_inside_submodule_path function we also need handle paths, that were stripped before, i.e. are the exact submodule path. This is why the conditions in die_inside_submodule_path are slightly different than in strip_submodule_slash_expensive. [1] https://www.google.com/search?q=item-%3Enowildcard_len [2] http://git.661346.n2.nabble.com/assert-failed-in-submodule-edge-case-td7628687.html https://www.spinics.net/lists/git/msg249473.html Helped-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> Helped-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2017-01-09 23:16:50 +00:00
'
test_done