A directory that is untracked does not imply that all files under it
should be categorized as untracked; in particular, if the caller is
interested in ignored files, many files or directories underneath the
untracked directory may be ignored. We previously partially handled
this right with DIR_SHOW_IGNORED_TOO, but missed DIR_SHOW_IGNORED. It
was not obvious, though, because the logic for untracked and excluded
files had been fused together making it harder to reason about. The
previous commit split that logic out, making it easier to notice that
DIR_SHOW_IGNORED was missing. Add it.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The show_other_directories case in treat_directory() tried to handle
both excludes and untracked files with the same logic, and mishandled
both the excludes and the untracked files in the process, in different
ways. Split that logic apart, and then focus on the logic for the
excludes; a subsequent commit will address the logic for untracked
files.
For show_other_directories, an excluded directory means that
every path underneath that directory will also be excluded. Given that
the calling code requested to just show directories when everything
under a directory had the same state (that's what the
"DIR_SHOW_OTHER_DIRECTORIES" flag means), we generally do not need to
traverse into such directories and can just immediately mark them as
ignored (i.e. as path_excluded). The only reason we cannot just
immediately return path_excluded is the DIR_HIDE_EMPTY_DIRECTORIES flag
and the possibility that the ignored directory is an empty directory.
The code previously treated DIR_SHOW_IGNORED_TOO in most cases as an
exception as well, which was wrong. It can sometimes reduce the number
of cases where we need to recurse (namely if
DIR_SHOW_IGNORED_TOO_MODE_MATCHING is also set), but should not be able
to increase the number of cases where we need to recurse. Fix the logic
accordingly.
Some sidenotes about possible confusion with dir.c:
* "ignored" often refers to an untracked ignore", i.e. a file which is
not tracked which matches one of the ignore/exclusion rules. But you
can also have a "tracked ignore", a tracked file that happens to match
one of the ignore/exclusion rules and which dir.c has to worry about
since "git ls-files -c -i" is supposed to list them.
* The dir code often uses "ignored" and "excluded" interchangeably,
which you need to keep in mind while reading the code.
* "exclude" is used multiple ways in the code:
* As noted above, "exclude" is often a synonym for "ignored".
* The logic for parsing .gitignore files was re-used in
.git/info/sparse-checkout, except there it is used to mark paths that
the user wants to *keep*. This was mostly addressed by commit
65edd96aec ("treewide: rename 'exclude' methods to 'pattern'",
2019-09-03), but every once in a while you'll find a comment about
"exclude" referring to these patterns that might in fact be in use
by the sparse-checkout machinery for inclusion rules.
* The word "EXCLUDE" is also used for pathspec negation, as in
(pathspec->items[3].magic & PATHSPEC_EXCLUDE)
Thus if a user had a .gitignore file containing
*~
*.log
!settings.log
And then ran
git add -- 'settings.*' ':^settings.log'
Then :^settings.log is a pathspec negation making settings.log not
be requested to be added even though all other settings.* files are
being added. Also, !settings.log in the gitignore file is a negative
exclude pattern meaning that settings.log is normally a file we
want to track even though all other *.log files are ignored.
Sometimes it feels like dir.c needs its own glossary with its many
definitions, including the multiply-defined terms.
Reported-by: Jason Gore <Jason.Gore@microsoft.com>
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
In the last commit, we added a testcase showing that the directory
traversal machinery sometimes traverses into directories unnecessarily.
Here we show that there are cases where it does the opposite: it does
not traverse into directories, despite those directories having
important files that need to be flagged.
Add a testcase showing that `git ls-files -o -i --directory` can omit
some of the files it should be listing, and another showing that `git
clean -fX` can fail to clean out some of the expected files.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The PNPM package manager is apparently creating deeply nested (but
ignored) directory structures; traversing them is costly
performance-wise, unnecessary, and in some cases is even throwing
warnings/errors because the paths are too long to handle on various
platforms. Add a testcase that checks for such unnecessary directory
traversal.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
As a follow-up to d162b25f95 (tests: remove support for
GIT_TEST_GETTEXT_POISON, 2021-01-20) remove those uses of the now
always true C_LOCALE_OUTPUT prerequisite from those tests which
declare it as an argument to test_expect_{success,failure}.
Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
I was going to title this "dir: more synchronizing of
treat_leading_path() and read_directory_recursive()", a nod to commit
777b420347 ("dir: synchronize treat_leading_path() and
read_directory_recursive()", 2019-12-19), but the title was too long.
Anyway, first the backstory...
fill_directory() has always had a slightly error-prone interface: it
returns a subset of paths which *might* match the specified pathspec; it
was intended to prune away some paths which didn't match the specified
pathspec and keep at least all the ones that did match it. Given this
interface, callers were responsible to post-process the results and
check whether each actually matched the pathspec.
builtin/clean.c did this. It would first prune out duplicates (e.g. if
"dir" was returned as well as all files under "dir/", then it would
simplify this to just "dir"), and after pruning duplicates it would
compare the remaining paths to the specified pathspec(s). This
post-processing itself could run into problems, though, as noted in
commit 404ebceda0 ("dir: also check directories for matching
pathspecs", 2019-09-17):
For the case of git-clean and a set of pathspecs of "dir/file" and
"more", this caused a problem because we'd end up with dir entries
for both of
"dir"
"dir/file"
Then correct_untracked_entries() would try to helpfully prune
duplicates for us by removing "dir/file" since it's under "dir",
leaving us with
"dir"
Since the original pathspec only had "dir/file", the only entry left
doesn't match and leaves nothing to be removed. (Note that if only
one pathspec was specified, e.g. only "dir/file", then the
common_prefix_len optimizations in fill_directory would cause us to
bypass this problem, making it appear in simple tests that we could
correctly remove manually specified pathspecs.)
That commit fixed the issue -- when multiple pathspecs were specified --
by making sure fill_directory() wouldn't return both "dir" and
"dir/file" outside the common_prefix_len optimization path. This is
where it starts to get fun.
In commit b9670c1f5e ("dir: fix checks on common prefix directory",
2019-12-19), we noticed that the common_prefix_len wasn't doing
appropriate checks and letting all kinds of stuff through, resulting in
recursing into .git/ directories and other craziness. So it started
locking down and doing checks on pathnames within that code path. That
continued with commit 777b420347 ("dir: synchronize
treat_leading_path() and read_directory_recursive()", 2019-12-19), which
noted the following:
Our optimization to avoid calling into read_directory_recursive()
when all pathspecs have a common leading directory mean that we need
to match the logic that read_directory_recursive() would use if we
had just called it from the root. Since it does more than call
treat_path() we need to copy that same logic.
...and then it more forcefully addressed the issue with this wonderfully
ironic statement:
Needing to duplicate logic like this means it is guaranteed someone
will eventually need to make further changes and forget to update
both locations. It is tempting to just nuke the leading_directory
special casing to avoid such bugs and simplify the code, but
unpack_trees' verify_clean_subdirectory() also calls
read_directory() and does so with a non-empty leading path, so I'm
hesitant to try to restructure further. Add obnoxious warnings to
treat_leading_path() and read_directory_recursive() to try to warn
people of such problems.
You would think that with such a strongly worded description, that its
author would have actually ensured that the logic in
treat_leading_path() and read_directory_recursive() did actually match
and that *everything* that was needed had at least been copied over at
the time that this paragraph was written. But you'd be wrong, I messed
it up by missing part of the logic.
Copy the missing bits to fix the new final test in t7300.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
b9670c1f5e (dir: fix checks on common prefix directory, 2019-12-19)
modified the way pathspecs are handled when handling a directory
during "git clean -f <path>". While this improved the behavior for
known test breakages, it also regressed in how the clean command
handles cleaning a specified file.
Add a test case that demonstrates this behavior. This test passes
before b9670c1f5e then fails after.
Helped-by: Kevin Willford <Kevin.Willford@microsoft.com>
Signed-off-by: Derrick Stolee <dstolee@microsoft.com>
Reviewed-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Users expect files in a nested git repository to be left alone unless
sufficiently forced (with two -f's). Unfortunately, in certain
circumstances, git would delete both tracked (and possibly dirty) files
and untracked files within a nested repository. To explain how this
happens, let's contrast a couple cases. First, take the following
example setup (which assumes we are already within a git repo):
git init nested
cd nested
>tracked
git add tracked
git commit -m init
>untracked
cd ..
In this setup, everything works as expected; running 'git clean -fd'
will result in fill_directory() returning the following paths:
nested/
nested/tracked
nested/untracked
and then correct_untracked_entries() would notice this can be compressed
to
nested/
and then since "nested/" is a directory, we would call
remove_dirs("nested/", ...), which would
check is_nonbare_repository_dir() and then decide to skip it.
However, if someone also creates an ignored file:
>nested/ignored
then running 'git clean -fd' would result in fill_directory() returning
the same paths:
nested/
nested/tracked
nested/untracked
but correct_untracked_entries() will notice that we had ignored entries
under nested/ and thus simplify this list to
nested/tracked
nested/untracked
Since these are not directories, we do not call remove_dirs() which was
the only place that had the is_nonbare_repository_dir() safety check --
resulting in us deleting both the untracked file and the tracked (and
possibly dirty) file.
One possible fix for this issue would be walking the parent directories
of each path and checking if they represent nonbare repositories, but
that would be wasteful. Even if we added caching of some sort, it's
still a waste because we should have been able to check that "nested/"
represented a nonbare repository before even descending into it in the
first place. Add a DIR_SKIP_NESTED_GIT flag to dir_struct.flags and use
it to prevent fill_directory() and friends from descending into nested
git repos.
With this change, we also modify two regression tests added in commit
91479b9c72 ("t7300: add tests to document behavior of clean and nested
git", 2015-06-15). That commit, nor its series, nor the six previous
iterations of that series on the mailing list discussed why those tests
coded the expectation they did. In fact, it appears their purpose was
simply to test _existing_ behavior to make sure that the performance
changes didn't change the behavior. However, these two tests directly
contradicted the manpage's claims that two -f's were required to delete
files/directories under a nested git repository. While one could argue
that the user gave an explicit path which matched files/directories that
were within a nested repository, there's a slippery slope that becomes
very difficult for users to understand once you go down that route (e.g.
what if they specified "git clean -f -d '*.c'"?) It would also be hard
to explain what the exact behavior was; avoid such problems by making it
really simple.
Also, clean up some grammar errors describing this functionality in the
git-clean manpage.
Finally, there are still a couple bugs with -ffd not cleaning out enough
(e.g. missing the nested .git) and with -ffdX possibly cleaning out the
wrong files (paying attention to outer .gitignore instead of inner).
This patch does not address these cases at all (and does not change the
behavior relative to those flags), it only fixes the handling when given
a single -f. See
https://public-inbox.org/git/20190905212043.GC32087@szeder.dev/ for more
discussion of the -ffd[X?] bugs.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The -d flag pre-dated git-clean's ability to have paths specified. As
such, the default for git-clean was to only remove untracked files in
the current directory, and -d existed to allow it to recurse into
subdirectories.
The interaction of paths and the -d option appears to not have been
carefully considered, as evidenced by numerous bugs and a dearth of
tests covering such pairings in the testsuite. The definition turns out
to be important, so let's look at some of the various ways one could
interpret the -d option:
A) Without -d, only look in subdirectories which contain tracked
files under them; with -d, also look in subdirectories which
are untracked for files to clean.
B) Without specified paths from the user for us to delete, we need to
have some kind of default, so...without -d, only look in
subdirectories which contain tracked files under them; with -d,
also look in subdirectories which are untracked for files to clean.
The important distinction here is that choice B says that the presence
or absence of '-d' is irrelevant if paths are specified. The logic
behind option B is that if a user explicitly asked us to clean a
specified pathspec, then we should clean anything that matches that
pathspec. Some examples may clarify. Should
git clean -f untracked_dir/file
remove untracked_dir/file or not? It seems crazy not to, but a strict
reading of option A says it shouldn't be removed. How about
git clean -f untracked_dir/file1 tracked_dir/file2
or
git clean -f untracked_dir_1/file1 untracked_dir_2/file2
? Should it remove either or both of these files? Should it require
multiple runs to remove both the files listed? (If this sounds like a
crazy question to even ask, see the commit message of "t7300: Add some
testcases showing failure to clean specified pathspecs" added earlier in
this patch series.) What if -ffd were used instead of -f -- should that
allow these to be removed? Should it take multiple invocations with
-ffd? What if a glob (such as '*tracked*') were used instead of
spelling out the directory names? What if the filenames involved globs,
such as
git clean -f '*.o'
or
git clean -f '*/*.o'
?
The current documentation actually suggests a definition that is
slightly different than choice A, and the implementation prior to this
series provided something radically different than either choices A or
B. (The implementation, though, was clearly just buggy). There may be
other choices as well. However, for almost any given choice of
definition for -d that I can think of, some of the examples above will
appear buggy to the user. The only case that doesn't have negative
surprises is choice B: treat a user-specified path as a request to clean
all untracked files which match that path specification, including
recursing into any untracked directories.
Change the documentation and basic implementation to use this
definition.
There were two regression tests that indirectly depended on the current
implementation, but neither was about subdirectory handling. These two
tests were introduced in commit 5b7570cfb4 ("git-clean: add tests for
relative path", 2008-03-07) which was solely created to add coverage for
the changes in commit fb328947c8e ("git-clean: correct printing relative
path", 2008-03-07). Both tests specified a directory that happened to
have an untracked subdirectory, but both were only checking that the
resulting printout of a file that was removed was shown with a relative
path. Update these tests appropriately.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
For git clean, if a directory is entirely untracked and the user did not
specify -d (corresponding to DIR_SHOW_IGNORED_TOO), then we usually do
not want to remove that directory and thus do not recurse into it.
However, if the user manually specified specific (or even globbed) paths
somewhere under that directory to remove, then we need to recurse into
the directory to make sure we remove the relevant paths under that
directory as the user requested.
Note that this does not mean that the recursed-into directory will be
added to dir->entries for later removal; as of a few commits earlier in
this series, there is another more strict match check that is run after
returning from a recursed-into directory before deciding to add it to the
list of entries. Therefore, this will only result in files underneath
the given directory which match one of the pathspecs being added to the
entries list.
Two notes of potential interest to future readers:
* If we wanted to only recurse into a directory when it is specifically
matched rather than matched-via-glob (e.g. '*.c'), then we could do
so via making the final non-zero return in match_pathspec_item be
MATCHED_RECURSIVELY instead of MATCHED_RECURSIVELY_LEADING_PATHSPEC.
(Note that the relative order of MATCHED_RECURSIVELY_LEADING_PATHSPEC
and MATCHED_RECURSIVELY are important for such a change.) I was
leaving open that possibility while writing an RFC asking for the
behavior we want, but even though we don't want it, that knowledge
might help you understand the code flow better.
* There is a growing amount of logic in read_directory_recursive() for
deciding whether to recurse into a subdirectory. However, there is a
comment immediately preceding this logic that says to recurse if
instructed by treat_path(). It may be better for the logic in
read_directory_recursive() to ultimately be moved to treat_path() (or
another function it calls, such as treat_directory()), but I have
left that for someone else to tackle in the future.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Even if a directory doesn't match a pathspec, it is possible, depending
on the precise pathspecs, that some file underneath it might. So we
special case and recurse into the directory for such situations. However,
we previously always added any untracked directory that we recursed into
to the list of untracked paths, regardless of whether the directory
itself matched the pathspec.
For the case of git-clean and a set of pathspecs of "dir/file" and "more",
this caused a problem because we'd end up with dir entries for both of
"dir"
"dir/file"
Then correct_untracked_entries() would try to helpfully prune duplicates
for us by removing "dir/file" since it's under "dir", leaving us with
"dir"
Since the original pathspec only had "dir/file", the only entry left
doesn't match and leaves nothing to be removed. (Note that if only one
pathspec was specified, e.g. only "dir/file", then the common_prefix_len
optimizations in fill_directory would cause us to bypass this problem,
making it appear in simple tests that we could correctly remove manually
specified pathspecs.)
Fix this by actually checking whether the directory we are about to add
to the list of dir entries actually matches the pathspec; only do this
matching check after we have already returned from recursing into the
directory.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Someone brought me a testcase where multiple git-clean invocations were
required to clean out unwanted files:
mkdir d{1,2}
touch d{1,2}/ut
touch d1/t && git add d1/t
With this setup, the user would need to run
git clean -ffd */ut
twice to delete both ut files.
A little testing showed some interesting variants:
* If only one of those two ut files existed (either one), then only one
clean command would be necessary.
* If both directories had tracked files, then only one git clean would
be necessary to clean both files.
* If both directories had no tracked files then the clean command above
would never clean either of the untracked files despite the pathspec
explicitly calling both of them out.
A bisect showed that the failure to clean out the files started with
commit cf424f5fd8 ("clean: respect pathspecs with "-d", 2014-03-10).
However, that pointed to a separate issue: while the "-d" flag was used
by the original user who showed me this problem, that flag should have
been irrelevant to this problem. Testing again without the "-d" flag
showed that the same buggy behavior exists without using that flag, and
has in fact existed since before cf424f5fd8.
Although these problems at first are perceived to be different (e.g.
never clearing out the requested files vs. taking multiple invocations
to get everything cleared out), they are actually just different
manifestations of the same problem. The case with multiple directories
that have no tracked files is the more general case; solving it will
solve all the others. So, I concentrate on it. Add testcases showing
that multiple untracked files within entirely untracked directories
cannot be cleaned when specifying these files to git clean via
pathspecs.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
'git clean -fd' must not delete an untracked directory if it belongs
to a different Git repository or worktree. Unfortunately, if a
'.gitignore' rule in the outer repository happens to match a file in a
nested repository or worktree, then something goes awry and 'git clean
-fd' does delete the content of the nested repository's worktree
except that ignored file, potentially leading to data loss.
Add a test to 't7300-clean.sh' to demonstrate this breakage.
This issue is a regression introduced in 6b1db43109 (clean: teach
clean -d to preserve ignored paths, 2017-05-23).
Signed-off-by: SZEDER Gábor <szeder.dev@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
When `lstat()` failed, `git clean` would abort without an error
message, leaving the user quite puzzled.
In particular on Windows, where the default maximum path length is
quite small (yet there are ways to circumvent that limit in many
cases), it is very important that users be given an indication why
their command failed because of too long paths when it did.
This test case makes sure that a warning is issued that would have
helped the user who reported this issue:
https://github.com/git-for-windows/git/issues/521
Note that we temporarily set `core.longpaths = false` in the regression
test; this ensures forward-compatibility with the `core.longpaths`
feature that has not yet been upstreamed from Git for Windows.
Helped-by: René Scharfe <l.s.r@web.de>
Helped-by: SZEDER Gábor <szeder.dev@gmail.com>
Helped-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
There is an implicit assumption that a directory containing only
untracked and ignored paths should itself be considered untracked. This
makes sense in use cases where we're asking if a directory should be
added to the git database, but not when we're asking if a directory can
be safely removed from the working tree; as a result, clean -d would
assume that an "untracked" directory containing ignored paths could be
deleted, even though doing so would also remove the ignored paths.
To get around this, we teach clean -d to collect ignored paths and skip
an untracked directory if it contained an ignored path, instead just
removing the untracked contents thereof. To achieve this, cmd_clean()
has to collect all untracked contents of untracked directories, in
addition to all ignored paths, to determine which untracked dirs must be
skipped (because they contain ignored paths) and which ones should *not*
be skipped.
For this purpose, correct_untracked_entries() is introduced to prune a
given dir_struct of untracked entries containing ignored paths and those
untracked entries encompassed by the untracked entries which are not
pruned away.
A memory leak is also fixed in cmd_clean().
This also fixes the known breakage in t7300, since clean -d now skips
untracked directories containing ignored paths.
Signed-off-by: Samuel Lijin <sxlijin@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
If git sees a directory which contains only untracked and ignored
files, clean -d should not remove that directory. It was recently
discovered that this is *not* true of git clean -d, and it's possible
that this has never worked correctly; this test and its accompanying
patch series aims to fix that.
Signed-off-by: Samuel Lijin <sxlijin@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The test runs `chmod 0` on a file to test a case where Git fails to
read it, but that would not work if it is run as root.
Reported-by: Jan Keromnes <janx@linux.com>
Fix-proposed-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
While we are here, remove some boilerplate by using test_commit.
Signed-off-by: Erik Elfström <erik.elfstrom@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
A test case introduced by 91479b9c (t7300: add tests to document
behavior of clean and nested git) uses 'chmod 0' to verify that a
subdirectory that has an unreadable .git file is not removed. This can
work only when the system pays attention to the permissions set with
'chmod'. Therefore, set the POSIXPERM prerequisite on the test case.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Sixt <j6t@kdbg.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
"git clean" uses resolve_gitlink_ref() to check for the presence of
nested git repositories, but it has the drawback of creating a
ref_cache entry for every directory that should potentially be
cleaned. The linear search through the ref_cache list causes a massive
performance hit for large number of directories.
Modify clean.c:remove_dirs to use setup.c:is_git_directory and
setup.c:read_gitfile_gently instead.
Both these functions will open files and parse contents when they find
something that looks like a git repository. This is ok from a
performance standpoint since finding repository candidates should be
comparatively rare.
Using is_git_directory and read_gitfile_gently should give a more
standardized check for what is and what isn't a git repository but
also gives three behavioral changes.
The first change is that we will now detect and avoid cleaning empty
nested git repositories (only init run). This is desirable.
Second, we will no longer die when cleaning a file named ".git" with
garbage content (it will be cleaned instead). This is also desirable.
The last change is that we will detect and avoid cleaning empty bare
repositories that have been placed in a directory named ".git". This
is not desirable but should have no real user impact since we already
fail to clean non-empty bare repositories in the same scenario. This
is thus deemed acceptable.
On top of this we add some extra precautions. If read_gitfile_gently
fails to open the git file, read the git file or verify the path in
the git file we assume that the path with the git file is a valid
repository and avoid cleaning.
Update t7300 to reflect these changes in behavior.
The time to clean an untracked directory containing 100000 sub
directories went from 61s to 1.7s after this change.
Helped-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Erik Elfström <erik.elfstrom@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Many tests that predate the "verbose" helper function use a
pattern like:
test ... || {
echo ...
false
}
to give more verbose output. Using the helper, we can do
this with a single line, and avoid a || which interacts
badly with &&-chaining (besides fooling --chain-lint, we hit
the error block no matter which command in the chain failed,
so we may often show useless results).
In most cases, the messages printed by "verbose" are equally
good (in some cases better; t6006 accidentally redirects the
message to a file!). The exception is t7001, whose output
suffers slightly. However, it's still enough to show the
user which part failed, given that we will have just printed
the test script to stderr.
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
We create a directory that cannot be removed, confirm that
it cannot be removed, and then fix it like:
chmod 0 foo &&
test_must_fail git clean -d -f &&
chmod 755 foo
If the middle step fails but leaves the directory (e.g., the
bug is that clean does not notice the failure), this
pollutes the test repo with an unremovable directory. Not
only does this cause further tests to fail, but it means
that "rm -rf" fails on the whole trash directory, and the
user has to intervene manually to even re-run the test script.
We can bump the "chmod 755" recovery to a test_when_finished
block to be sure that it always runs.
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
git-clean uses read_directory to fill in a `struct dir` with
potential hits. However, read_directory does not actually
check against our pathspec. It uses a simplified version
that may turn up false positives. As a result, we need to
check that any hits match our pathspec. We do so reliably
for non-directories. For directories, if "-d" is not given
we check that the pathspec matched exactly (i.e., we are
even stricter, and require an explicit "git clean foo" to
clean "foo/"). But if "-d" is given, rather than relaxing
the exact match to allow a recursive match, we do not check
the pathspec at all.
This regression was introduced in 113f10f (Make git-clean a
builtin, 2007-11-11).
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The notion of "ignored tracked" directories introduced in 721ac4ed "dir.c:
Make git-status --ignored more consistent" has a few unwanted side effects:
- git-clean -d -X: deletes ignored tracked directories. git-clean should
never delete tracked content.
- git-ls-files --ignored --other --directory: lists ignored tracked
directories instead of "other" directories.
- git-status --ignored: lists ignored tracked directories while contained
files may be listed as modified. Paths listed by git-status should be
disjoint (except in long format where a path may be listed in both the
staged and unstaged section).
Additionally, the current behaviour violates documentation in gitignore(5)
("Specifies intentionally *untracked* files to ignore") and Documentation/
technical/api-directory-listing.txt ("DIR_SHOW_OTHER_DIRECTORIES: Include
a directory that is *not tracked*.").
In dir.c::treat_directory, remove the special handling of ignored tracked
directories, so that the DIR_SHOW_OTHER_DIRECTORIES flag only affects
"other" (i.e. untracked) directories. In dir.c::dir_add_name, check that
added paths are untracked even if DIR_SHOW_IGNORED is set.
Signed-off-by: Karsten Blees <blees@dcon.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
remove_dir_recursively() has a check to avoid removing the directory it
was asked to remove without recursing into it and report success when the
directory is the top level of a working tree of a nested git repository,
to protect such a repository from "clean -f" (without double -f). If a
working tree of a nested git repository is in a subdirectory of a toplevel
project, however, this protection did not apply by mistake; we forgot to
pass the REMOVE_DIR_KEEP_NESTED_GIT down to the recursive removal
codepath.
This requires us to also teach the higher level not to remove the
directory it is asked to remove, when the recursed invocation did not
remove the directory it was asked to remove due to a nested git
repository, as it is not an error to leave the parent directories of such
a nested repository.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
As a last ditch effort, try rmdir(2) when we cannot read the directory
to be removed. It may be an empty directory that we can remove without
any permission, as long as we can modify its parent directory.
Noticed by Linus.
Signed-off-by: Alex Riesen <raa.lkml@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The test fails on Windows since 2dec68c (tests: add missing &&, batch 2).
Even though this test allocates and leaves behind files, subsequent tests
do not depend on this, so it is safe to just skip it.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Sixt <j6t@kdbg.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Same rules as before: this patch only adds " &&" to the end of
some lines in the test suite.
Intended to be applied on top of or squashed with the last
batch if they look okay.
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The ancient touch on Solaris 7 thinks that a decimal number supplied as
the first argument specifies a date_time to give to the files specified by
the remaining arguments. In this case, it fails to parse '1' as a proper
date_time and exits with a failure status. Workaround this flaw by
rearranging the arguments supplied to touch so that a non-digit appears
first and touch will not be confused.
Signed-off-by: Brandon Casey <casey@nrlssc.navy.mil>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
* ab/test-2: (51 commits)
tests: factor HOME=$(pwd) in test-lib.sh
test-lib: use subshell instead of cd $new && .. && cd $old
tests: simplify "missing PREREQ" message
t/t0000-basic.sh: Run the passing TODO test inside its own test-lib
test-lib: Allow overriding of TEST_DIRECTORY
test-lib: Use "$GIT_BUILD_DIR" instead of "$TEST_DIRECTORY"/../
test-lib: Use $TEST_DIRECTORY or $GIT_BUILD_DIR instead of $(pwd) and ../
test: Introduce $GIT_BUILD_DIR
cvs tests: do not touch test CVS repositories shipped with source
t/t9602-cvsimport-branches-tags.sh: Add a PERL prerequisite
t/t9601-cvsimport-vendor-branch.sh: Add a PERL prerequisite
t/t7105-reset-patch.sh: Add a PERL prerequisite
t/t9001-send-email.sh: convert setup code to tests
t/t9001-send-email.sh: change from skip_all=* to prereq skip
t/t9001-send-email.sh: Remove needless PROG=* assignment
t/t9600-cvsimport.sh: change from skip_all=* to prereq skip
lib-patch-mode tests: change from skip_all=* to prereq skip
t/t3701-add-interactive.sh: change from skip_all=* to prereq skip
tests: Move FILEMODE prerequisite to lib-prereq-FILEMODE.sh
t/Makefile: Create test-results dir for smoke target
...
Conflicts:
t/t6035-merge-dir-to-symlink.sh
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>
* nd/sparse: (25 commits)
t7002: test for not using external grep on skip-worktree paths
t7002: set test prerequisite "external-grep" if supported
grep: do not do external grep on skip-worktree entries
commit: correctly respect skip-worktree bit
ie_match_stat(): do not ignore skip-worktree bit with CE_MATCH_IGNORE_VALID
tests: rename duplicate t1009
sparse checkout: inhibit empty worktree
Add tests for sparse checkout
read-tree: add --no-sparse-checkout to disable sparse checkout support
unpack-trees(): ignore worktree check outside checkout area
unpack_trees(): apply $GIT_DIR/info/sparse-checkout to the final index
unpack-trees(): "enable" sparse checkout and load $GIT_DIR/info/sparse-checkout
unpack-trees.c: generalize verify_* functions
unpack-trees(): add CE_WT_REMOVE to remove on worktree alone
Introduce "sparse checkout"
dir.c: export excluded_1() and add_excludes_from_file_1()
excluded_1(): support exclude files in index
unpack-trees(): carry skip-worktree bit over in merged_entry()
Read .gitignore from index if it is skip-worktree
Avoid writing to buffer in add_excludes_from_file_1()
...
Conflicts:
.gitignore
Documentation/config.txt
Documentation/git-update-index.txt
Makefile
entry.c
t/t7002-grep.sh
This adds index as a prerequisite for directory listing (with
exclude). At the moment directory listing is used by "git clean",
"git add", "git ls-files" and "git status"/"git commit" and
unpack_trees()-related commands. These commands have been
checked/modified to populate index before doing directory listing.
add_excludes_from_file() does not enable this feature, because it
is used to read .git/info/exclude and some explicit files specified
by "git ls-files".
Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
When you have an embedded git work tree in your work tree (be it
an orphaned submodule, or an independent checkout of an unrelated
project), "git clean -d -f" blindly descended into it and removed
everything. This is rarely what the user wants.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
On Windows, you cannot remove files that are in use, not even with
'rm -rf'. So we need to run 'exec <foo/bar' inside a subshell lest
removing the whole test repository fail.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Signed-off-by: Johannes Sixt <j6t@kdbg.org>
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>
This fixes the remainder of the issues where the test script itself is at
fault for failing when the git checkout path contains whitespace or other
shell metacharacters.
The majority of git svn tests used the idiom
test_expect_success "title" "test script using $svnrepo"
These were changed to have the test script in single-quotes:
test_expect_success "title" 'test script using "$svnrepo"'
which unfortunately makes the patch appear larger than it really is.
One consequence of this change is that in the verbose test output the
value of $svnrepo (and in some cases other variables, too) is no
longer expanded, i.e. previously we saw
* expecting success:
test script using /path/to/git/t/trash/svnrepo
but now it is:
* expecting success:
test script using "$svnrepo"
Signed-off-by: Bryan Donlan <bdonlan@fushizen.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
This adds tests for recent change by Dmitry to fix the report "git
clean" gives on removed paths, and also makes sure the command detects
paths that is outside working tree.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Keep the file open to: the OS does not allow removal of open files.
The saner systems just have a saner permission model and chmod 0
is enough for the test.
Signed-off-by: Alex Riesen <raa.lkml@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
git-clean simply ignored errors if removing a file or directory failed. This
patch makes it raise a warning and the exit code also greater than zero if
there are remaining files.
Signed-off-by: Miklos Vajna <vmiklos@frugalware.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
* maint:
git-clean: honor core.excludesfile
Documentation: Fix man page breakage with DocBook XSL v1.72
git-remote.txt: fix typo
core-tutorial.txt: Fix argument mistake in an example.
replace reference to git-rm with git-reset in git-commit doc
Grammar fixes for gitattributes documentation
Don't allow fast-import tree delta chains to exceed maximum depth
revert/cherry-pick: allow starting from dirty work tree.
t/t3404: fix test for a bogus todo file.
Conflicts:
fast-import.c
