Commit graph

3 commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Thomas Rast 2179870803 combined diff: correctly handle truncated file
Consider an evil merge of two commits A and B, both of which have a
file 'foo', but the merge result does not have that file.

The combined-diff code learned in 4462731 (combine-diff: do not punt
on removed or added files., 2006-02-06) to concisely show only the
removal, since that is the evil part and the previous contents are
presumably uninteresting.

However, to diagnose an empty merge result, it overloaded the variable
that holds the file's length.  This means that the check also triggers
for truncated files.  Consequently, such files were not shown in the
diff at all despite the merge being clearly evil.

Fix this by adding a new variable that distinguishes whether the file
was deleted (which is the case 4462731 handled) or truncated.  In the
truncated case, we show the full combined diff again, which is rather
spammy but at least does not hide the evilness.

Reported-by: David Martínez Martí <desarrollo@gestiweb.com>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Rast <trast@student.ethz.ch>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2010-04-17 10:23:59 -07:00
Junio C Hamano df3dac3758 tests: update tests that used to fail
"diff --cc" output t4038 tests was fixed by b810cbb (diff --cc: a lost
line at the beginning of the file is shown incorrectly, 2009-07-22), which
was actually the commit that introduced this test..

An error in "git merge -s resolve" t6035 tests was fixed by 730f728
(unpack-trees.c: look ahead in the index, 2009-09-20).

Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2010-01-28 00:41:52 -08:00
Junio C Hamano b810cbbde9 diff --cc: a lost line at the beginning of the file is shown incorrectly
When combine-diff inspected the diff from one parent to the merge result,
it misinterpreted a header in the form @@ -l,k +0,0 @@.

This hunk header means that K lines were removed from the beginning of the
file, so the lost lines must be queued to the sline that represents the
first line of the merge result, but we incremented our pointer incorrectly
and ended up queuing it to the second line, which in turn made the lossage
appear _after_ the first line.

Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2009-07-22 15:38:22 -07:00