The tests for the merge machinery are spread over several places.
Collect them into t64xx for simplicity. Some notes:
t60[234]*.sh:
Merge tests started in t602*, overgrew bisect and remote tracking
tests in t6030, t6040, and t6041, and nearly overtook replace tests
in t6050. This made picking out relevant tests that I wanted to run
in a tighter loop slightly more annoying for years.
t303*.sh:
These started out as tests for the 'merge-recursive' toplevel command,
but did not restrict to that and had lots of overlap with the
underlying merge machinery.
t7405, t7613:
submodule-specific merge logic started out in submodule.c but was
moved to merge-recursive.c in commit 18cfc08866 ("submodule.c: move
submodule merging to merge-recursive.c", 2018-05-15). Since these
tests are about the logic found in the merge machinery, moving these
tests to be with the merge tests makes sense.
t7607, t7609:
Having tests spread all over the place makes it more likely that
additional tests related to a certain piece of logic grow in all those
other places. Much like t303*.sh, these two tests were about the
underlying merge machinery rather than outer levels.
Tests that were NOT moved:
t76[01]*.sh:
Other than the four tests mentioned above, the remaining tests in
t76[01]*.sh are related to non-recursive merge strategies, parameter
parsing, and other stuff associated with the highlevel builtin/merge.c
rather than the recursive merge machinery.
t3[45]*.sh:
The rebase testcases in t34*.sh also test the merge logic pretty
heavily; sometimes changes I make only trigger failures in the rebase
tests. The rebase tests are already nicely coupled together, though,
and I didn't want to mess that up. Similar comments apply for the
cherry-pick tests in t35*.sh.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
This test description looks like it was written with the originally
observed behavior ("causes segfault") rather than the desired and now
current behavior ("does not cause segfault"). Fix it.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
These are all cases where we do a setup step of the form:
for i in $foo; do
set_up $i || break
done &&
more_setup
would not notice a failure in set_up (because break always
returns a 0 exit code). These are just setup steps that we
do not expect to fail, but it does not hurt to be defensive.
Most can be fixed by converting the "break" to a "return 1"
(since we eval our tests inside a function for just this
purpose). A few of the loops are inside subshells, so we can
use just "exit 1" to break out of the subshell. And a few
can actually be made shorter by just unrolling the loop.
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
When you are trying to come up with the final result (i.e. depth=0), you
want to record how the conflict arose by registering the state of the
common ancestor, your branch and the other branch in the index, hence you
want to do update_stages().
When you are merging with positive depth, that is because of a criss-cross
merge situation. In such a case, you would need to record the tentative
result, with conflict markers and all, as if the merge went cleanly, even
if there are conflicts, in order to write it out as a tree object later to
be used as a common ancestor tree.
update_file() calls update_file_flags() with update_cache=1 to signal that
the result needs to be written to the index at stage #0 (i.e. merged), and
the code should not clobber the index further by calling update_stages().
The codepath to deal with rename/delete conflict in a recursive merge
however left the index unmerged.
Signed-off-by: Dave Olszewski <cxreg@pobox.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
