development/git
development/git
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/git/git synced 2024-10-30 03:13:24 +00:00
Code Issues Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity
git/t/t6043-merge-rename-directories.sh
Elijah Newren 1de70dbd1a merge-recursive: fix check for skipability of working tree updates 
The can-working-tree-updates-be-skipped check has had a long and blemished
history.  The update can be skipped iff:
  a) The merge is clean
  b) The merge matches what was in HEAD (content, mode, pathname)
  c) The target path is usable (i.e. not involved in D/F conflict)

Traditionally, we split b into parts:
  b1) The merged result matches the content and mode found in HEAD
  b2) The merged target path existed in HEAD

Steps a & b1 are easy to check; we have always gotten those right.  While
it is easy to overlook step c, this was fixed seven years ago with commit
4ab9a157d0 ("merge_content(): Check whether D/F conflicts are still
present", 2010-09-20).  merge-recursive didn't have a readily available
way to directly check step b2, so various approximations were used:

  * In commit b2c8c0a762 ("merge-recursive: When we detect we can skip
    an update, actually skip it", 2011-02-28), it was noted that although
    the code claimed it was skipping the update, it did not actually skip
    the update.  The code was made to skip it, but used lstat(path, ...)
    as an approximation to path-was-tracked-in-index-before-merge.

  * In commit 5b448b8530 ("merge-recursive: When we detect we can skip
    an update, actually skip it", 2011-08-11), the problem with using
    lstat was noted.  It was changed to the approximation
       path2 && strcmp(path, path2)
    which is also wrong.  !path2 || strcmp(path, path2) would have been
    better, but would have fallen short with directory renames.

  * In c5b761fb27 ("merge-recursive: ensure we write updates for
    directory-renamed file", 2018-02-14), the problem with the previous
    approximation was noted and changed to
       was_tracked(path)
    That looks close to what we were trying to answer, but was_tracked()
    as implemented at the time should have been named is_tracked(); it
    returned something different than what we were looking for.

  * To make matters more complex, fixing was_tracked() isn't sufficient
    because the splitting of b into b1 and b2 is wrong.  Consider the
    following merge with a rename/add conflict:
       side A: modify foo, add unrelated bar
       side B: rename foo->bar (but don't modify the mode or contents)
    In this case, the three-way merge of original foo, A's foo, and B's
    bar will result in a desired pathname of bar with the same
    mode/contents that A had for foo.  Thus, A had the right mode and
    contents for the file, and it had the right pathname present (namely,
    bar), but the bar that was present was unrelated to the contents, so
    the working tree update was not skippable.

Fix this by introducing a new function:
   was_tracked_and_matches(o, path, &mfi.oid, mfi.mode)
and use it to directly check for condition b.

Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2018-05-08 16:11:00 +09:00

3998 lines
98 KiB
Bash
Executable file
Raw Blame History

#!/bin/sh
test_description="recursive merge with directory renames"
# includes checking of many corner cases, with a similar methodology to:
# t6042: corner cases with renames but not criss-cross merges
# t6036: corner cases with both renames and criss-cross merges
#
# The setup for all of them, pictorially, is:
#
# A
# o
# / \
# O o ?
# \ /
# o
# B
#
# To help make it easier to follow the flow of tests, they have been
# divided into sections and each test will start with a quick explanation
# of what commits O, A, and B contain.
#
# Notation:
# z/{b,c} means files z/b and z/c both exist
# x/d_1 means file x/d exists with content d1. (Purpose of the
# underscore notation is to differentiate different
# files that might be renamed into each other's paths.)
. ./test-lib.sh
###########################################################################
# SECTION 1: Basic cases we should be able to handle
###########################################################################
# Testcase 1a, Basic directory rename.
# Commit O: z/{b,c}
# Commit A: y/{b,c}
# Commit B: z/{b,c,d,e/f}
# Expected: y/{b,c,d,e/f}
test_expect_success '1a-setup: Simple directory rename detection' '
test_create_repo 1a &&
(
cd 1a &&
mkdir z &&
echo b >z/b &&
echo c >z/c &&
git add z &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "O" &&
git branch O &&
git branch A &&
git branch B &&
git checkout A &&
git mv z y &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "A" &&
git checkout B &&
echo d >z/d &&
mkdir z/e &&
echo f >z/e/f &&
git add z/d z/e/f &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "B"
)
'
test_expect_success '1a-check: Simple directory rename detection' '
(
cd 1a &&
git checkout A^0 &&
git merge -s recursive B^0 &&
git ls-files -s >out &&
test_line_count = 4 out &&
git rev-parse >actual \
HEAD:y/b HEAD:y/c HEAD:y/d HEAD:y/e/f &&
git rev-parse >expect \
O:z/b O:z/c B:z/d B:z/e/f &&
test_cmp expect actual &&
git hash-object y/d >actual &&
git rev-parse B:z/d >expect &&
test_cmp expect actual &&
test_must_fail git rev-parse HEAD:z/d &&
test_must_fail git rev-parse HEAD:z/e/f &&
test_path_is_missing z/d &&
test_path_is_missing z/e/f
)
'
# Testcase 1b, Merge a directory with another
# Commit O: z/{b,c}, y/d
# Commit A: z/{b,c,e}, y/d
# Commit B: y/{b,c,d}
# Expected: y/{b,c,d,e}
test_expect_success '1b-setup: Merge a directory with another' '
test_create_repo 1b &&
(
cd 1b &&
mkdir z &&
echo b >z/b &&
echo c >z/c &&
mkdir y &&
echo d >y/d &&
git add z y &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "O" &&
git branch O &&
git branch A &&
git branch B &&
git checkout A &&
echo e >z/e &&
git add z/e &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "A" &&
git checkout B &&
git mv z/b y &&
git mv z/c y &&
rmdir z &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "B"
)
'
test_expect_success '1b-check: Merge a directory with another' '
(
cd 1b &&
git checkout A^0 &&
git merge -s recursive B^0 &&
git ls-files -s >out &&
test_line_count = 4 out &&
git rev-parse >actual \
HEAD:y/b HEAD:y/c HEAD:y/d HEAD:y/e &&
git rev-parse >expect \
O:z/b O:z/c O:y/d A:z/e &&
test_cmp expect actual &&
test_must_fail git rev-parse HEAD:z/e
)
'
# Testcase 1c, Transitive renaming
# (Related to testcases 3a and 6d -- when should a transitive rename apply?)
# (Related to testcases 9c and 9d -- can transitivity repeat?)
# (Related to testcase 12b -- joint-transitivity?)
# Commit O: z/{b,c}, x/d
# Commit A: y/{b,c}, x/d
# Commit B: z/{b,c,d}
# Expected: y/{b,c,d} (because x/d -> z/d -> y/d)
test_expect_success '1c-setup: Transitive renaming' '
test_create_repo 1c &&
(
cd 1c &&
mkdir z &&
echo b >z/b &&
echo c >z/c &&
mkdir x &&
echo d >x/d &&
git add z x &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "O" &&
git branch O &&
git branch A &&
git branch B &&
git checkout A &&
git mv z y &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "A" &&
git checkout B &&
git mv x/d z/d &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "B"
)
'
test_expect_success '1c-check: Transitive renaming' '
(
cd 1c &&
git checkout A^0 &&
git merge -s recursive B^0 &&
git ls-files -s >out &&
test_line_count = 3 out &&
git rev-parse >actual \
HEAD:y/b HEAD:y/c HEAD:y/d &&
git rev-parse >expect \
O:z/b O:z/c O:x/d &&
test_cmp expect actual &&
test_must_fail git rev-parse HEAD:x/d &&
test_must_fail git rev-parse HEAD:z/d &&
test_path_is_missing z/d
)
'
# Testcase 1d, Directory renames (merging two directories into one new one)
# cause a rename/rename(2to1) conflict
# (Related to testcases 1c and 7b)
# Commit O. z/{b,c}, y/{d,e}
# Commit A. x/{b,c}, y/{d,e,m,wham_1}
# Commit B. z/{b,c,n,wham_2}, x/{d,e}
# Expected: x/{b,c,d,e,m,n}, CONFLICT:(y/wham_1 & z/wham_2 -> x/wham)
# Note: y/m & z/n should definitely move into x. By the same token, both
# y/wham_1 & z/wham_2 should too...giving us a conflict.
test_expect_success '1d-setup: Directory renames cause a rename/rename(2to1) conflict' '
test_create_repo 1d &&
(
cd 1d &&
mkdir z &&
echo b >z/b &&
echo c >z/c &&
mkdir y &&
echo d >y/d &&
echo e >y/e &&
git add z y &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "O" &&
git branch O &&
git branch A &&
git branch B &&
git checkout A &&
git mv z x &&
echo m >y/m &&
echo wham1 >y/wham &&
git add y &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "A" &&
git checkout B &&
git mv y x &&
echo n >z/n &&
echo wham2 >z/wham &&
git add z &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "B"
)
'
test_expect_success '1d-check: Directory renames cause a rename/rename(2to1) conflict' '
(
cd 1d &&
git checkout A^0 &&
test_must_fail git merge -s recursive B^0 >out &&
test_i18ngrep "CONFLICT (rename/rename)" out &&
git ls-files -s >out &&
test_line_count = 8 out &&
git ls-files -u >out &&
test_line_count = 2 out &&
git ls-files -o >out &&
test_line_count = 3 out &&
git rev-parse >actual \
:0:x/b :0:x/c :0:x/d :0:x/e :0:x/m :0:x/n &&
git rev-parse >expect \
O:z/b O:z/c O:y/d O:y/e A:y/m B:z/n &&
test_cmp expect actual &&
test_must_fail git rev-parse :0:x/wham &&
git rev-parse >actual \
:2:x/wham :3:x/wham &&
git rev-parse >expect \
A:y/wham B:z/wham &&
test_cmp expect actual &&
test_path_is_missing x/wham &&
test_path_is_file x/wham~HEAD &&
test_path_is_file x/wham~B^0 &&
git hash-object >actual \
x/wham~HEAD x/wham~B^0 &&
git rev-parse >expect \
A:y/wham B:z/wham &&
test_cmp expect actual
)
'
# Testcase 1e, Renamed directory, with all filenames being renamed too
# (Related to testcases 9f & 9g)
# Commit O: z/{oldb,oldc}
# Commit A: y/{newb,newc}
# Commit B: z/{oldb,oldc,d}
# Expected: y/{newb,newc,d}
test_expect_success '1e-setup: Renamed directory, with all files being renamed too' '
test_create_repo 1e &&
(
cd 1e &&
mkdir z &&
echo b >z/oldb &&
echo c >z/oldc &&
git add z &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "O" &&
git branch O &&
git branch A &&
git branch B &&
git checkout A &&
mkdir y &&
git mv z/oldb y/newb &&
git mv z/oldc y/newc &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "A" &&
git checkout B &&
echo d >z/d &&
git add z/d &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "B"
)
'
test_expect_success '1e-check: Renamed directory, with all files being renamed too' '
(
cd 1e &&
git checkout A^0 &&
git merge -s recursive B^0 &&
git ls-files -s >out &&
test_line_count = 3 out &&
git rev-parse >actual \
HEAD:y/newb HEAD:y/newc HEAD:y/d &&
git rev-parse >expect \
O:z/oldb O:z/oldc B:z/d &&
test_cmp expect actual &&
test_must_fail git rev-parse HEAD:z/d
)
'
# Testcase 1f, Split a directory into two other directories
# (Related to testcases 3a, all of section 2, and all of section 4)
# Commit O: z/{b,c,d,e,f}
# Commit A: z/{b,c,d,e,f,g}
# Commit B: y/{b,c}, x/{d,e,f}
# Expected: y/{b,c}, x/{d,e,f,g}
test_expect_success '1f-setup: Split a directory into two other directories' '
test_create_repo 1f &&
(
cd 1f &&
mkdir z &&
echo b >z/b &&
echo c >z/c &&
echo d >z/d &&
echo e >z/e &&
echo f >z/f &&
git add z &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "O" &&
git branch O &&
git branch A &&
git branch B &&
git checkout A &&
echo g >z/g &&
git add z/g &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "A" &&
git checkout B &&
mkdir y &&
mkdir x &&
git mv z/b y/ &&
git mv z/c y/ &&
git mv z/d x/ &&
git mv z/e x/ &&
git mv z/f x/ &&
rmdir z &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "B"
)
'
test_expect_success '1f-check: Split a directory into two other directories' '
(
cd 1f &&
git checkout A^0 &&
git merge -s recursive B^0 &&
git ls-files -s >out &&
test_line_count = 6 out &&
git rev-parse >actual \
HEAD:y/b HEAD:y/c HEAD:x/d HEAD:x/e HEAD:x/f HEAD:x/g &&
git rev-parse >expect \
O:z/b O:z/c O:z/d O:z/e O:z/f A:z/g &&
test_cmp expect actual &&
test_path_is_missing z/g &&
test_must_fail git rev-parse HEAD:z/g
)
'
###########################################################################
# Rules suggested by testcases in section 1:
#
# We should still detect the directory rename even if it wasn't just
# the directory renamed, but the files within it. (see 1b)
#
# If renames split a directory into two or more others, the directory
# with the most renames, "wins" (see 1c). However, see the testcases
# in section 2, plus testcases 3a and 4a.
###########################################################################
###########################################################################
# SECTION 2: Split into multiple directories, with equal number of paths
#
# Explore the splitting-a-directory rules a bit; what happens in the
# edge cases?
#
# Note that there is a closely related case of a directory not being
# split on either side of history, but being renamed differently on
# each side. See testcase 8e for that.
###########################################################################
# Testcase 2a, Directory split into two on one side, with equal numbers of paths
# Commit O: z/{b,c}
# Commit A: y/b, w/c
# Commit B: z/{b,c,d}
# Expected: y/b, w/c, z/d, with warning about z/ -> (y/ vs. w/) conflict
test_expect_success '2a-setup: Directory split into two on one side, with equal numbers of paths' '
test_create_repo 2a &&
(
cd 2a &&
mkdir z &&
echo b >z/b &&
echo c >z/c &&
git add z &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "O" &&
git branch O &&
git branch A &&
git branch B &&
git checkout A &&
mkdir y &&
mkdir w &&
git mv z/b y/ &&
git mv z/c w/ &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "A" &&
git checkout B &&
echo d >z/d &&
git add z/d &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "B"
)
'
test_expect_success '2a-check: Directory split into two on one side, with equal numbers of paths' '
(
cd 2a &&
git checkout A^0 &&
test_must_fail git merge -s recursive B^0 >out &&
test_i18ngrep "CONFLICT.*directory rename split" out &&
git ls-files -s >out &&
test_line_count = 3 out &&
git ls-files -u >out &&
test_line_count = 0 out &&
git ls-files -o >out &&
test_line_count = 1 out &&
git rev-parse >actual \
:0:y/b :0:w/c :0:z/d &&
git rev-parse >expect \
O:z/b O:z/c B:z/d &&
test_cmp expect actual
)
'
# Testcase 2b, Directory split into two on one side, with equal numbers of paths
# Commit O: z/{b,c}
# Commit A: y/b, w/c
# Commit B: z/{b,c}, x/d
# Expected: y/b, w/c, x/d; No warning about z/ -> (y/ vs. w/) conflict
test_expect_success '2b-setup: Directory split into two on one side, with equal numbers of paths' '
test_create_repo 2b &&
(
cd 2b &&
mkdir z &&
echo b >z/b &&
echo c >z/c &&
git add z &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "O" &&
git branch O &&
git branch A &&
git branch B &&
git checkout A &&
mkdir y &&
mkdir w &&
git mv z/b y/ &&
git mv z/c w/ &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "A" &&
git checkout B &&
mkdir x &&
echo d >x/d &&
git add x/d &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "B"
)
'
test_expect_success '2b-check: Directory split into two on one side, with equal numbers of paths' '
(
cd 2b &&
git checkout A^0 &&
git merge -s recursive B^0 >out &&
git ls-files -s >out &&
test_line_count = 3 out &&
git ls-files -u >out &&
test_line_count = 0 out &&
git ls-files -o >out &&
test_line_count = 1 out &&
git rev-parse >actual \
:0:y/b :0:w/c :0:x/d &&
git rev-parse >expect \
O:z/b O:z/c B:x/d &&
test_cmp expect actual &&
test_i18ngrep ! "CONFLICT.*directory rename split" out
)
'
###########################################################################
# Rules suggested by section 2:
#
# None; the rule was already covered in section 1. These testcases are
# here just to make sure the conflict resolution and necessary warning
# messages are handled correctly.
###########################################################################
###########################################################################
# SECTION 3: Path in question is the source path for some rename already
#
# Combining cases from Section 1 and trying to handle them could lead to
# directory renaming detection being over-applied. So, this section
# provides some good testcases to check that the implementation doesn't go
# too far.
###########################################################################
# Testcase 3a, Avoid implicit rename if involved as source on other side
# (Related to testcases 1c, 1f, and 9h)
# Commit O: z/{b,c,d}
# Commit A: z/{b,c,d} (no change)
# Commit B: y/{b,c}, x/d
# Expected: y/{b,c}, x/d
test_expect_success '3a-setup: Avoid implicit rename if involved as source on other side' '
test_create_repo 3a &&
(
cd 3a &&
mkdir z &&
echo b >z/b &&
echo c >z/c &&
echo d >z/d &&
git add z &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "O" &&
git branch O &&
git branch A &&
git branch B &&
git checkout A &&
test_tick &&
git commit --allow-empty -m "A" &&
git checkout B &&
mkdir y &&
mkdir x &&
git mv z/b y/ &&
git mv z/c y/ &&
git mv z/d x/ &&
rmdir z &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "B"
)
'
test_expect_success '3a-check: Avoid implicit rename if involved as source on other side' '
(
cd 3a &&
git checkout A^0 &&
git merge -s recursive B^0 &&
git ls-files -s >out &&
test_line_count = 3 out &&
git rev-parse >actual \
HEAD:y/b HEAD:y/c HEAD:x/d &&
git rev-parse >expect \
O:z/b O:z/c O:z/d &&
test_cmp expect actual
)
'
# Testcase 3b, Avoid implicit rename if involved as source on other side
# (Related to testcases 5c and 7c, also kind of 1e and 1f)
# Commit O: z/{b,c,d}
# Commit A: y/{b,c}, x/d
# Commit B: z/{b,c}, w/d
# Expected: y/{b,c}, CONFLICT:(z/d -> x/d vs. w/d)
# NOTE: We're particularly checking that since z/d is already involved as
# a source in a file rename on the same side of history, that we don't
# get it involved in directory rename detection. If it were, we might
# end up with CONFLICT:(z/d -> y/d vs. x/d vs. w/d), i.e. a
# rename/rename/rename(1to3) conflict, which is just weird.
test_expect_success '3b-setup: Avoid implicit rename if involved as source on current side' '
test_create_repo 3b &&
(
cd 3b &&
mkdir z &&
echo b >z/b &&
echo c >z/c &&
echo d >z/d &&
git add z &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "O" &&
git branch O &&
git branch A &&
git branch B &&
git checkout A &&
mkdir y &&
mkdir x &&
git mv z/b y/ &&
git mv z/c y/ &&
git mv z/d x/ &&
rmdir z &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "A" &&
git checkout B &&
mkdir w &&
git mv z/d w/ &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "B"
)
'
test_expect_success '3b-check: Avoid implicit rename if involved as source on current side' '
(
cd 3b &&
git checkout A^0 &&
test_must_fail git merge -s recursive B^0 >out &&
test_i18ngrep CONFLICT.*rename/rename.*z/d.*x/d.*w/d out &&
test_i18ngrep ! CONFLICT.*rename/rename.*y/d out &&
git ls-files -s >out &&
test_line_count = 5 out &&
git ls-files -u >out &&
test_line_count = 3 out &&
git ls-files -o >out &&
test_line_count = 1 out &&
git rev-parse >actual \
:0:y/b :0:y/c :1:z/d :2:x/d :3:w/d &&
git rev-parse >expect \
O:z/b O:z/c O:z/d O:z/d O:z/d &&
test_cmp expect actual &&
test_path_is_missing z/d &&
git hash-object >actual \
x/d w/d &&
git rev-parse >expect \
O:z/d O:z/d &&
test_cmp expect actual
)
'
###########################################################################
# Rules suggested by section 3:
#
# Avoid directory-rename-detection for a path, if that path is the source
# of a rename on either side of a merge.
###########################################################################
###########################################################################
# SECTION 4: Partially renamed directory; still exists on both sides of merge
#
# What if we were to attempt to do directory rename detection when someone
# "mostly" moved a directory but still left some files around, or,
# equivalently, fully renamed a directory in one commmit and then recreated
# that directory in a later commit adding some new files and then tried to
# merge?
#
# It's hard to divine user intent in these cases, because you can make an
# argument that, depending on the intermediate history of the side being
# merged, that some users will want files in that directory to
# automatically be detected and renamed, while users with a different
# intermediate history wouldn't want that rename to happen.
#
# I think that it is best to simply not have directory rename detection
# apply to such cases. My reasoning for this is four-fold: (1) it's
# easiest for users in general to figure out what happened if we don't
# apply directory rename detection in any such case, (2) it's an easy rule
# to explain ["We don't do directory rename detection if the directory
# still exists on both sides of the merge"], (3) we can get some hairy
# edge/corner cases that would be really confusing and possibly not even
# representable in the index if we were to even try, and [related to 3] (4)
# attempting to resolve this issue of divining user intent by examining
# intermediate history goes against the spirit of three-way merges and is a
# path towards crazy corner cases that are far more complex than what we're
# already dealing with.
#
# Note that the wording of the rule ("We don't do directory rename
# detection if the directory still exists on both sides of the merge.")
# also excludes "renaming" of a directory into a subdirectory of itself
# (e.g. /some/dir/* -> /some/dir/subdir/*). It may be possible to carve
# out an exception for "renaming"-beneath-itself cases without opening
# weird edge/corner cases for other partial directory renames, but for now
# we are keeping the rule simple.
#
# This section contains a test for a partially-renamed-directory case.
###########################################################################
# Testcase 4a, Directory split, with original directory still present
# (Related to testcase 1f)
# Commit O: z/{b,c,d,e}
# Commit A: y/{b,c,d}, z/e
# Commit B: z/{b,c,d,e,f}
# Expected: y/{b,c,d}, z/{e,f}
# NOTE: Even though most files from z moved to y, we don't want f to follow.
test_expect_success '4a-setup: Directory split, with original directory still present' '
test_create_repo 4a &&
(
cd 4a &&
mkdir z &&
echo b >z/b &&
echo c >z/c &&
echo d >z/d &&
echo e >z/e &&
git add z &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "O" &&
git branch O &&
git branch A &&
git branch B &&
git checkout A &&
mkdir y &&
git mv z/b y/ &&
git mv z/c y/ &&
git mv z/d y/ &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "A" &&
git checkout B &&
echo f >z/f &&
git add z/f &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "B"
)
'
test_expect_success '4a-check: Directory split, with original directory still present' '
(
cd 4a &&
git checkout A^0 &&
git merge -s recursive B^0 &&
git ls-files -s >out &&
test_line_count = 5 out &&
git ls-files -u >out &&
test_line_count = 0 out &&
git ls-files -o >out &&
test_line_count = 1 out &&
git rev-parse >actual \
HEAD:y/b HEAD:y/c HEAD:y/d HEAD:z/e HEAD:z/f &&
git rev-parse >expect \
O:z/b O:z/c O:z/d O:z/e B:z/f &&
test_cmp expect actual
)
'
###########################################################################
# Rules suggested by section 4:
#
# Directory-rename-detection should be turned off for any directories (as
# a source for renames) that exist on both sides of the merge. (The "as
# a source for renames" clarification is due to cases like 1c where
# the target directory exists on both sides and we do want the rename
# detection.) But, sadly, see testcase 8b.
###########################################################################
###########################################################################
# SECTION 5: Files/directories in the way of subset of to-be-renamed paths
#
# Implicitly renaming files due to a detected directory rename could run
# into problems if there are files or directories in the way of the paths
# we want to rename. Explore such cases in this section.
###########################################################################
# Testcase 5a, Merge directories, other side adds files to original and target
# Commit O: z/{b,c}, y/d
# Commit A: z/{b,c,e_1,f}, y/{d,e_2}
# Commit B: y/{b,c,d}
# Expected: z/e_1, y/{b,c,d,e_2,f} + CONFLICT warning
# NOTE: While directory rename detection is active here causing z/f to
# become y/f, we did not apply this for z/e_1 because that would
# give us an add/add conflict for y/e_1 vs y/e_2. This problem with
# this add/add, is that both versions of y/e are from the same side
# of history, giving us no way to represent this conflict in the
# index.
test_expect_success '5a-setup: Merge directories, other side adds files to original and target' '
test_create_repo 5a &&
(
cd 5a &&
mkdir z &&
echo b >z/b &&
echo c >z/c &&
mkdir y &&
echo d >y/d &&
git add z y &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "O" &&
git branch O &&
git branch A &&
git branch B &&
git checkout A &&
echo e1 >z/e &&
echo f >z/f &&
echo e2 >y/e &&
git add z/e z/f y/e &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "A" &&
git checkout B &&
git mv z/b y/ &&
git mv z/c y/ &&
rmdir z &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "B"
)
'
test_expect_success '5a-check: Merge directories, other side adds files to original and target' '
(
cd 5a &&
git checkout A^0 &&
test_must_fail git merge -s recursive B^0 >out &&
test_i18ngrep "CONFLICT.*implicit dir rename" out &&
git ls-files -s >out &&
test_line_count = 6 out &&
git ls-files -u >out &&
test_line_count = 0 out &&
git ls-files -o >out &&
test_line_count = 1 out &&
git rev-parse >actual \
:0:y/b :0:y/c :0:y/d :0:y/e :0:z/e :0:y/f &&
git rev-parse >expect \
O:z/b O:z/c O:y/d A:y/e A:z/e A:z/f &&
test_cmp expect actual
)
'
# Testcase 5b, Rename/delete in order to get add/add/add conflict
# (Related to testcase 8d; these may appear slightly inconsistent to users;
# Also related to testcases 7d and 7e)
# Commit O: z/{b,c,d_1}
# Commit A: y/{b,c,d_2}
# Commit B: z/{b,c,d_1,e}, y/d_3
# Expected: y/{b,c,e}, CONFLICT(add/add: y/d_2 vs. y/d_3)
# NOTE: If z/d_1 in commit B were to be involved in dir rename detection, as
# we normaly would since z/ is being renamed to y/, then this would be
# a rename/delete (z/d_1 -> y/d_1 vs. deleted) AND an add/add/add
# conflict of y/d_1 vs. y/d_2 vs. y/d_3. Add/add/add is not
# representable in the index, so the existence of y/d_3 needs to
# cause us to bail on directory rename detection for that path, falling
# back to git behavior without the directory rename detection.
test_expect_success '5b-setup: Rename/delete in order to get add/add/add conflict' '
test_create_repo 5b &&
(
cd 5b &&
mkdir z &&
echo b >z/b &&
echo c >z/c &&
echo d1 >z/d &&
git add z &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "O" &&
git branch O &&
git branch A &&
git branch B &&
git checkout A &&
git rm z/d &&
git mv z y &&
echo d2 >y/d &&
git add y/d &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "A" &&
git checkout B &&
mkdir y &&
echo d3 >y/d &&
echo e >z/e &&
git add y/d z/e &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "B"
)
'
test_expect_success '5b-check: Rename/delete in order to get add/add/add conflict' '
(
cd 5b &&
git checkout A^0 &&
test_must_fail git merge -s recursive B^0 >out &&
test_i18ngrep "CONFLICT (add/add).* y/d" out &&
git ls-files -s >out &&
test_line_count = 5 out &&
git ls-files -u >out &&
test_line_count = 2 out &&
git ls-files -o >out &&
test_line_count = 1 out &&
git rev-parse >actual \
:0:y/b :0:y/c :0:y/e :2:y/d :3:y/d &&
git rev-parse >expect \
O:z/b O:z/c B:z/e A:y/d B:y/d &&
test_cmp expect actual &&
test_must_fail git rev-parse :1:y/d &&
test_path_is_file y/d
)
'
# Testcase 5c, Transitive rename would cause rename/rename/rename/add/add/add
# (Directory rename detection would result in transitive rename vs.
# rename/rename(1to2) and turn it into a rename/rename(1to3). Further,
# rename paths conflict with separate adds on the other side)
# (Related to testcases 3b and 7c)
# Commit O: z/{b,c}, x/d_1
# Commit A: y/{b,c,d_2}, w/d_1
# Commit B: z/{b,c,d_1,e}, w/d_3, y/d_4
# Expected: A mess, but only a rename/rename(1to2)/add/add mess. Use the
# presence of y/d_4 in B to avoid doing transitive rename of
# x/d_1 -> z/d_1 -> y/d_1, so that the only paths we have at
# y/d are y/d_2 and y/d_4. We still do the move from z/e to y/e,
# though, because it doesn't have anything in the way.
test_expect_success '5c-setup: Transitive rename would cause rename/rename/rename/add/add/add' '
test_create_repo 5c &&
(
cd 5c &&
mkdir z &&
echo b >z/b &&
echo c >z/c &&
mkdir x &&
echo d1 >x/d &&
git add z x &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "O" &&
git branch O &&
git branch A &&
git branch B &&
git checkout A &&
git mv z y &&
echo d2 >y/d &&
git add y/d &&
git mv x w &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "A" &&
git checkout B &&
git mv x/d z/ &&
mkdir w &&
mkdir y &&
echo d3 >w/d &&
echo d4 >y/d &&
echo e >z/e &&
git add w/ y/ z/e &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "B"
)
'
test_expect_success '5c-check: Transitive rename would cause rename/rename/rename/add/add/add' '
(
cd 5c &&
git checkout A^0 &&
test_must_fail git merge -s recursive B^0 >out &&
test_i18ngrep "CONFLICT (rename/rename).*x/d.*w/d.*z/d" out &&
test_i18ngrep "CONFLICT (add/add).* y/d" out &&
git ls-files -s >out &&
test_line_count = 9 out &&
git ls-files -u >out &&
test_line_count = 6 out &&
git ls-files -o >out &&
test_line_count = 3 out &&
git rev-parse >actual \
:0:y/b :0:y/c :0:y/e &&
git rev-parse >expect \
O:z/b O:z/c B:z/e &&
test_cmp expect actual &&
test_must_fail git rev-parse :1:y/d &&
git rev-parse >actual \
:2:w/d :3:w/d :1:x/d :2:y/d :3:y/d :3:z/d &&
git rev-parse >expect \
O:x/d B:w/d O:x/d A:y/d B:y/d O:x/d &&
test_cmp expect actual &&
git hash-object >actual \
w/d~HEAD w/d~B^0 z/d &&
git rev-parse >expect \
O:x/d B:w/d O:x/d &&
test_cmp expect actual &&
test_path_is_missing x/d &&
test_path_is_file y/d &&
grep -q "<<<<" y/d # conflict markers should be present
)
'
# Testcase 5d, Directory/file/file conflict due to directory rename
# Commit O: z/{b,c}
# Commit A: y/{b,c,d_1}
# Commit B: z/{b,c,d_2,f}, y/d/e
# Expected: y/{b,c,d/e,f}, z/d_2, CONFLICT(file/directory), y/d_1~HEAD
# Note: The fact that y/d/ exists in B makes us bail on directory rename
# detection for z/d_2, but that doesn't prevent us from applying the
# directory rename detection for z/f -> y/f.
test_expect_success '5d-setup: Directory/file/file conflict due to directory rename' '
test_create_repo 5d &&
(
cd 5d &&
mkdir z &&
echo b >z/b &&
echo c >z/c &&
git add z &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "O" &&
git branch O &&
git branch A &&
git branch B &&
git checkout A &&
git mv z y &&
echo d1 >y/d &&
git add y/d &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "A" &&
git checkout B &&
mkdir -p y/d &&
echo e >y/d/e &&
echo d2 >z/d &&
echo f >z/f &&
git add y/d/e z/d z/f &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "B"
)
'
test_expect_success '5d-check: Directory/file/file conflict due to directory rename' '
(
cd 5d &&
git checkout A^0 &&
test_must_fail git merge -s recursive B^0 >out &&
test_i18ngrep "CONFLICT (file/directory).*y/d" out &&
git ls-files -s >out &&
test_line_count = 6 out &&
git ls-files -u >out &&
test_line_count = 1 out &&
git ls-files -o >out &&
test_line_count = 2 out &&
git rev-parse >actual \
:0:y/b :0:y/c :0:z/d :0:y/f :2:y/d :0:y/d/e &&
git rev-parse >expect \
O:z/b O:z/c B:z/d B:z/f A:y/d B:y/d/e &&
test_cmp expect actual &&
git hash-object y/d~HEAD >actual &&
git rev-parse A:y/d >expect &&
test_cmp expect actual
)
'
###########################################################################
# Rules suggested by section 5:
#
# If a subset of to-be-renamed files have a file or directory in the way,
# "turn off" the directory rename for those specific sub-paths, falling
# back to old handling. But, sadly, see testcases 8a and 8b.
###########################################################################
###########################################################################
# SECTION 6: Same side of the merge was the one that did the rename
#
# It may sound obvious that you only want to apply implicit directory
# renames to directories if the _other_ side of history did the renaming.
# If you did make an implementation that didn't explicitly enforce this
# rule, the majority of cases that would fall under this section would
# also be solved by following the rules from the above sections. But
# there are still a few that stick out, so this section covers them just
# to make sure we also get them right.
###########################################################################
# Testcase 6a, Tricky rename/delete
# Commit O: z/{b,c,d}
# Commit A: z/b
# Commit B: y/{b,c}, z/d
# Expected: y/b, CONFLICT(rename/delete, z/c -> y/c vs. NULL)
# Note: We're just checking here that the rename of z/b and z/c to put
# them under y/ doesn't accidentally catch z/d and make it look like
# it is also involved in a rename/delete conflict.
test_expect_success '6a-setup: Tricky rename/delete' '
test_create_repo 6a &&
(
cd 6a &&
mkdir z &&
echo b >z/b &&
echo c >z/c &&
echo d >z/d &&
git add z &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "O" &&
git branch O &&
git branch A &&
git branch B &&
git checkout A &&
git rm z/c &&
git rm z/d &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "A" &&
git checkout B &&
mkdir y &&
git mv z/b y/ &&
git mv z/c y/ &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "B"
)
'
test_expect_success '6a-check: Tricky rename/delete' '
(
cd 6a &&
git checkout A^0 &&
test_must_fail git merge -s recursive B^0 >out &&
test_i18ngrep "CONFLICT (rename/delete).*z/c.*y/c" out &&
git ls-files -s >out &&
test_line_count = 2 out &&
git ls-files -u >out &&
test_line_count = 1 out &&
git ls-files -o >out &&
test_line_count = 1 out &&
git rev-parse >actual \
:0:y/b :3:y/c &&
git rev-parse >expect \
O:z/b O:z/c &&
test_cmp expect actual
)
'
# Testcase 6b, Same rename done on both sides
# (Related to testcases 6c and 8e)
# Commit O: z/{b,c}
# Commit A: y/{b,c}
# Commit B: y/{b,c}, z/d
# Expected: y/{b,c}, z/d
# Note: If we did directory rename detection here, we'd move z/d into y/,
# but B did that rename and still decided to put the file into z/,
# so we probably shouldn't apply directory rename detection for it.
test_expect_success '6b-setup: Same rename done on both sides' '
test_create_repo 6b &&
(
cd 6b &&
mkdir z &&
echo b >z/b &&
echo c >z/c &&
git add z &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "O" &&
git branch O &&
git branch A &&
git branch B &&
git checkout A &&
git mv z y &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "A" &&
git checkout B &&
git mv z y &&
mkdir z &&
echo d >z/d &&
git add z/d &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "B"
)
'
test_expect_success '6b-check: Same rename done on both sides' '
(
cd 6b &&
git checkout A^0 &&
git merge -s recursive B^0 &&
git ls-files -s >out &&
test_line_count = 3 out &&
git ls-files -u >out &&
test_line_count = 0 out &&
git ls-files -o >out &&
test_line_count = 1 out &&
git rev-parse >actual \
HEAD:y/b HEAD:y/c HEAD:z/d &&
git rev-parse >expect \
O:z/b O:z/c B:z/d &&
test_cmp expect actual
)
'
# Testcase 6c, Rename only done on same side
# (Related to testcases 6b and 8e)
# Commit O: z/{b,c}
# Commit A: z/{b,c} (no change)
# Commit B: y/{b,c}, z/d
# Expected: y/{b,c}, z/d
# NOTE: Seems obvious, but just checking that the implementation doesn't
# "accidentally detect a rename" and give us y/{b,c,d}.
test_expect_success '6c-setup: Rename only done on same side' '
test_create_repo 6c &&
(
cd 6c &&
mkdir z &&
echo b >z/b &&
echo c >z/c &&
git add z &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "O" &&
git branch O &&
git branch A &&
git branch B &&
git checkout A &&
test_tick &&
git commit --allow-empty -m "A" &&
git checkout B &&
git mv z y &&
mkdir z &&
echo d >z/d &&
git add z/d &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "B"
)
'
test_expect_success '6c-check: Rename only done on same side' '
(
cd 6c &&
git checkout A^0 &&
git merge -s recursive B^0 &&
git ls-files -s >out &&
test_line_count = 3 out &&
git ls-files -u >out &&
test_line_count = 0 out &&
git ls-files -o >out &&
test_line_count = 1 out &&
git rev-parse >actual \
HEAD:y/b HEAD:y/c HEAD:z/d &&
git rev-parse >expect \
O:z/b O:z/c B:z/d &&
test_cmp expect actual
)
'
# Testcase 6d, We don't always want transitive renaming
# (Related to testcase 1c)
# Commit O: z/{b,c}, x/d
# Commit A: z/{b,c}, x/d (no change)
# Commit B: y/{b,c}, z/d
# Expected: y/{b,c}, z/d
# NOTE: Again, this seems obvious but just checking that the implementation
# doesn't "accidentally detect a rename" and give us y/{b,c,d}.
test_expect_success '6d-setup: We do not always want transitive renaming' '
test_create_repo 6d &&
(
cd 6d &&
mkdir z &&
echo b >z/b &&
echo c >z/c &&
mkdir x &&
echo d >x/d &&
git add z x &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "O" &&
git branch O &&
git branch A &&
git branch B &&
git checkout A &&
test_tick &&
git commit --allow-empty -m "A" &&
git checkout B &&
git mv z y &&
git mv x z &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "B"
)
'
test_expect_success '6d-check: We do not always want transitive renaming' '
(
cd 6d &&
git checkout A^0 &&
git merge -s recursive B^0 &&
git ls-files -s >out &&
test_line_count = 3 out &&
git ls-files -u >out &&
test_line_count = 0 out &&
git ls-files -o >out &&
test_line_count = 1 out &&
git rev-parse >actual \
HEAD:y/b HEAD:y/c HEAD:z/d &&
git rev-parse >expect \
O:z/b O:z/c O:x/d &&
test_cmp expect actual
)
'
# Testcase 6e, Add/add from one-side
# Commit O: z/{b,c}
# Commit A: z/{b,c} (no change)
# Commit B: y/{b,c,d_1}, z/d_2
# Expected: y/{b,c,d_1}, z/d_2
# NOTE: Again, this seems obvious but just checking that the implementation
# doesn't "accidentally detect a rename" and give us y/{b,c} +
# add/add conflict on y/d_1 vs y/d_2.
test_expect_success '6e-setup: Add/add from one side' '
test_create_repo 6e &&
(
cd 6e &&
mkdir z &&
echo b >z/b &&
echo c >z/c &&
git add z &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "O" &&
git branch O &&
git branch A &&
git branch B &&
git checkout A &&
test_tick &&
git commit --allow-empty -m "A" &&
git checkout B &&
git mv z y &&
echo d1 > y/d &&
mkdir z &&
echo d2 > z/d &&
git add y/d z/d &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "B"
)
'
test_expect_success '6e-check: Add/add from one side' '
(
cd 6e &&
git checkout A^0 &&
git merge -s recursive B^0 &&
git ls-files -s >out &&
test_line_count = 4 out &&
git ls-files -u >out &&
test_line_count = 0 out &&
git ls-files -o >out &&
test_line_count = 1 out &&
git rev-parse >actual \
HEAD:y/b HEAD:y/c HEAD:y/d HEAD:z/d &&
git rev-parse >expect \
O:z/b O:z/c B:y/d B:z/d &&
test_cmp expect actual
)
'
###########################################################################
# Rules suggested by section 6:
#
# Only apply implicit directory renames to directories if the other
# side of history is the one doing the renaming.
###########################################################################
###########################################################################
# SECTION 7: More involved Edge/Corner cases
#
# The ruleset we have generated in the above sections seems to provide
# well-defined merges. But can we find edge/corner cases that either (a)
# are harder for users to understand, or (b) have a resolution that is
# non-intuitive or suboptimal?
#
# The testcases in this section dive into cases that I've tried to craft in
# a way to find some that might be surprising to users or difficult for
# them to understand (the next section will look at non-intuitive or
# suboptimal merge results). Some of the testcases are similar to ones
# from past sections, but have been simplified to try to highlight error
# messages using a "modified" path (due to the directory rename). Are
# users okay with these?
#
# In my opinion, testcases that are difficult to understand from this
# section is due to difficulty in the testcase rather than the directory
# renaming (similar to how t6042 and t6036 have difficult resolutions due
# to the problem setup itself being complex). And I don't think the
# error messages are a problem.
#
# On the other hand, the testcases in section 8 worry me slightly more...
###########################################################################
# Testcase 7a, rename-dir vs. rename-dir (NOT split evenly) PLUS add-other-file
# Commit O: z/{b,c}
# Commit A: y/{b,c}
# Commit B: w/b, x/c, z/d
# Expected: y/d, CONFLICT(rename/rename for both z/b and z/c)
# NOTE: There's a rename of z/ here, y/ has more renames, so z/d -> y/d.
test_expect_success '7a-setup: rename-dir vs. rename-dir (NOT split evenly) PLUS add-other-file' '
test_create_repo 7a &&
(
cd 7a &&
mkdir z &&
echo b >z/b &&
echo c >z/c &&
git add z &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "O" &&
git branch O &&
git branch A &&
git branch B &&
git checkout A &&
git mv z y &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "A" &&
git checkout B &&
mkdir w &&
mkdir x &&
git mv z/b w/ &&
git mv z/c x/ &&
echo d > z/d &&
git add z/d &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "B"
)
'
test_expect_success '7a-check: rename-dir vs. rename-dir (NOT split evenly) PLUS add-other-file' '
(
cd 7a &&
git checkout A^0 &&
test_must_fail git merge -s recursive B^0 >out &&
test_i18ngrep "CONFLICT (rename/rename).*z/b.*y/b.*w/b" out &&
test_i18ngrep "CONFLICT (rename/rename).*z/c.*y/c.*x/c" out &&
git ls-files -s >out &&
test_line_count = 7 out &&
git ls-files -u >out &&
test_line_count = 6 out &&
git ls-files -o >out &&
test_line_count = 1 out &&
git rev-parse >actual \
:1:z/b :2:y/b :3:w/b :1:z/c :2:y/c :3:x/c :0:y/d &&
git rev-parse >expect \
O:z/b O:z/b O:z/b O:z/c O:z/c O:z/c B:z/d &&
test_cmp expect actual &&
git hash-object >actual \
y/b w/b y/c x/c &&
git rev-parse >expect \
O:z/b O:z/b O:z/c O:z/c &&
test_cmp expect actual
)
'
# Testcase 7b, rename/rename(2to1), but only due to transitive rename
# (Related to testcase 1d)
# Commit O: z/{b,c}, x/d_1, w/d_2
# Commit A: y/{b,c,d_2}, x/d_1
# Commit B: z/{b,c,d_1}, w/d_2
# Expected: y/{b,c}, CONFLICT(rename/rename(2to1): x/d_1, w/d_2 -> y_d)
test_expect_success '7b-setup: rename/rename(2to1), but only due to transitive rename' '
test_create_repo 7b &&
(
cd 7b &&
mkdir z &&
mkdir x &&
mkdir w &&
echo b >z/b &&
echo c >z/c &&
echo d1 > x/d &&
echo d2 > w/d &&
git add z x w &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "O" &&
git branch O &&
git branch A &&
git branch B &&
git checkout A &&
git mv z y &&
git mv w/d y/ &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "A" &&
git checkout B &&
git mv x/d z/ &&
rmdir x &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "B"
)
'
test_expect_success '7b-check: rename/rename(2to1), but only due to transitive rename' '
(
cd 7b &&
git checkout A^0 &&
test_must_fail git merge -s recursive B^0 >out &&
test_i18ngrep "CONFLICT (rename/rename)" out &&
git ls-files -s >out &&
test_line_count = 4 out &&
git ls-files -u >out &&
test_line_count = 2 out &&
git ls-files -o >out &&
test_line_count = 3 out &&
git rev-parse >actual \
:0:y/b :0:y/c :2:y/d :3:y/d &&
git rev-parse >expect \
O:z/b O:z/c O:w/d O:x/d &&
test_cmp expect actual &&
test_path_is_missing y/d &&
test_path_is_file y/d~HEAD &&
test_path_is_file y/d~B^0 &&
git hash-object >actual \
y/d~HEAD y/d~B^0 &&
git rev-parse >expect \
O:w/d O:x/d &&
test_cmp expect actual
)
'
# Testcase 7c, rename/rename(1to...2or3); transitive rename may add complexity
# (Related to testcases 3b and 5c)
# Commit O: z/{b,c}, x/d
# Commit A: y/{b,c}, w/d
# Commit B: z/{b,c,d}
# Expected: y/{b,c}, CONFLICT(x/d -> w/d vs. y/d)
# NOTE: z/ was renamed to y/ so we do want to report
# neither CONFLICT(x/d -> w/d vs. z/d)
# nor CONFLiCT x/d -> w/d vs. y/d vs. z/d)
test_expect_success '7c-setup: rename/rename(1to...2or3); transitive rename may add complexity' '
test_create_repo 7c &&
(
cd 7c &&
mkdir z &&
echo b >z/b &&
echo c >z/c &&
mkdir x &&
echo d >x/d &&
git add z x &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "O" &&
git branch O &&
git branch A &&
git branch B &&
git checkout A &&
git mv z y &&
git mv x w &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "A" &&
git checkout B &&
git mv x/d z/ &&
rmdir x &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "B"
)
'
test_expect_success '7c-check: rename/rename(1to...2or3); transitive rename may add complexity' '
(
cd 7c &&
git checkout A^0 &&
test_must_fail git merge -s recursive B^0 >out &&
test_i18ngrep "CONFLICT (rename/rename).*x/d.*w/d.*y/d" out &&
git ls-files -s >out &&
test_line_count = 5 out &&
git ls-files -u >out &&
test_line_count = 3 out &&
git ls-files -o >out &&
test_line_count = 1 out &&
git rev-parse >actual \
:0:y/b :0:y/c :1:x/d :2:w/d :3:y/d &&
git rev-parse >expect \
O:z/b O:z/c O:x/d O:x/d O:x/d &&
test_cmp expect actual
)
'
# Testcase 7d, transitive rename involved in rename/delete; how is it reported?
# (Related somewhat to testcases 5b and 8d)
# Commit O: z/{b,c}, x/d
# Commit A: y/{b,c}
# Commit B: z/{b,c,d}
# Expected: y/{b,c}, CONFLICT(delete x/d vs rename to y/d)
# NOTE: z->y so NOT CONFLICT(delete x/d vs rename to z/d)
test_expect_success '7d-setup: transitive rename involved in rename/delete; how is it reported?' '
test_create_repo 7d &&
(
cd 7d &&
mkdir z &&
echo b >z/b &&
echo c >z/c &&
mkdir x &&
echo d >x/d &&
git add z x &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "O" &&
git branch O &&
git branch A &&
git branch B &&
git checkout A &&
git mv z y &&
git rm -rf x &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "A" &&
git checkout B &&
git mv x/d z/ &&
rmdir x &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "B"
)
'
test_expect_success '7d-check: transitive rename involved in rename/delete; how is it reported?' '
(
cd 7d &&
git checkout A^0 &&
test_must_fail git merge -s recursive B^0 >out &&
test_i18ngrep "CONFLICT (rename/delete).*x/d.*y/d" out &&
git ls-files -s >out &&
test_line_count = 3 out &&
git ls-files -u >out &&
test_line_count = 1 out &&
git ls-files -o >out &&
test_line_count = 1 out &&
git rev-parse >actual \
:0:y/b :0:y/c :3:y/d &&
git rev-parse >expect \
O:z/b O:z/c O:x/d &&
test_cmp expect actual
)
'
# Testcase 7e, transitive rename in rename/delete AND dirs in the way
# (Very similar to 'both rename source and destination involved in D/F conflict' from t6022-merge-rename.sh)
# (Also related to testcases 9c and 9d)
# Commit O: z/{b,c}, x/d_1
# Commit A: y/{b,c,d/g}, x/d/f
# Commit B: z/{b,c,d_1}
# Expected: rename/delete(x/d_1->y/d_1 vs. None) + D/F conflict on y/d
# y/{b,c,d/g}, y/d_1~B^0, x/d/f
# NOTE: The main path of interest here is d_1 and where it ends up, but
# this is actually a case that has two potential directory renames
# involved and D/F conflict(s), so it makes sense to walk through
# each step.
#
# Commit A renames z/ -> y/. Thus everything that B adds to z/
# should be instead moved to y/. This gives us the D/F conflict on
# y/d because x/d_1 -> z/d_1 -> y/d_1 conflicts with y/d/g.
#
# Further, commit B renames x/ -> z/, thus everything A adds to x/
# should instead be moved to z/...BUT we removed z/ and renamed it
# to y/, so maybe everything should move not from x/ to z/, but
# from x/ to z/ to y/. Doing so might make sense from the logic so
# far, but note that commit A had both an x/ and a y/; it did the
# renaming of z/ to y/ and created x/d/f and it clearly made these
# things separate, so it doesn't make much sense to push these
# together. Doing so is what I'd call a doubly transitive rename;
# see testcases 9c and 9d for further discussion of this issue and
# how it's resolved.
test_expect_success '7e-setup: transitive rename in rename/delete AND dirs in the way' '
test_create_repo 7e &&
(
cd 7e &&
mkdir z &&
echo b >z/b &&
echo c >z/c &&
mkdir x &&
echo d1 >x/d &&
git add z x &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "O" &&
git branch O &&
git branch A &&
git branch B &&
git checkout A &&
git mv z y &&
git rm x/d &&
mkdir -p x/d &&
mkdir -p y/d &&
echo f >x/d/f &&
echo g >y/d/g &&
git add x/d/f y/d/g &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "A" &&
git checkout B &&
git mv x/d z/ &&
rmdir x &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "B"
)
'
test_expect_success '7e-check: transitive rename in rename/delete AND dirs in the way' '
(
cd 7e &&
git checkout A^0 &&
test_must_fail git merge -s recursive B^0 >out &&
test_i18ngrep "CONFLICT (rename/delete).*x/d.*y/d" out &&
git ls-files -s >out &&
test_line_count = 5 out &&
git ls-files -u >out &&
test_line_count = 1 out &&
git ls-files -o >out &&
test_line_count = 2 out &&
git rev-parse >actual \
:0:x/d/f :0:y/d/g :0:y/b :0:y/c :3:y/d &&
git rev-parse >expect \
A:x/d/f A:y/d/g O:z/b O:z/c O:x/d &&
test_cmp expect actual &&
git hash-object y/d~B^0 >actual &&
git rev-parse O:x/d >expect &&
test_cmp expect actual
)
'
###########################################################################
# SECTION 8: Suboptimal merges
#
# As alluded to in the last section, the ruleset we have built up for
# detecting directory renames unfortunately has some special cases where it
# results in slightly suboptimal or non-intuitive behavior. This section
# explores these cases.
#
# To be fair, we already had non-intuitive or suboptimal behavior for most
# of these cases in git before introducing implicit directory rename
# detection, but it'd be nice if there was a modified ruleset out there
# that handled these cases a bit better.
###########################################################################
# Testcase 8a, Dual-directory rename, one into the others' way
# Commit O. x/{a,b}, y/{c,d}
# Commit A. x/{a,b,e}, y/{c,d,f}
# Commit B. y/{a,b}, z/{c,d}
#
# Possible Resolutions:
# w/o dir-rename detection: y/{a,b,f}, z/{c,d}, x/e
# Currently expected: y/{a,b,e,f}, z/{c,d}
# Optimal: y/{a,b,e}, z/{c,d,f}
#
# Note: Both x and y got renamed and it'd be nice to detect both, and we do
# better with directory rename detection than git did without, but the
# simple rule from section 5 prevents me from handling this as optimally as
# we potentially could.
test_expect_success '8a-setup: Dual-directory rename, one into the others way' '
test_create_repo 8a &&
(
cd 8a &&
mkdir x &&
mkdir y &&
echo a >x/a &&
echo b >x/b &&
echo c >y/c &&
echo d >y/d &&
git add x y &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "O" &&
git branch O &&
git branch A &&
git branch B &&
git checkout A &&
echo e >x/e &&
echo f >y/f &&
git add x/e y/f &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "A" &&
git checkout B &&
git mv y z &&
git mv x y &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "B"
)
'
test_expect_success '8a-check: Dual-directory rename, one into the others way' '
(
cd 8a &&
git checkout A^0 &&
git merge -s recursive B^0 &&
git ls-files -s >out &&
test_line_count = 6 out &&
git ls-files -u >out &&
test_line_count = 0 out &&
git ls-files -o >out &&
test_line_count = 1 out &&
git rev-parse >actual \
HEAD:y/a HEAD:y/b HEAD:y/e HEAD:y/f HEAD:z/c HEAD:z/d &&
git rev-parse >expect \
O:x/a O:x/b A:x/e A:y/f O:y/c O:y/d &&
test_cmp expect actual
)
'
# Testcase 8b, Dual-directory rename, one into the others' way, with conflicting filenames
# Commit O. x/{a_1,b_1}, y/{a_2,b_2}
# Commit A. x/{a_1,b_1,e_1}, y/{a_2,b_2,e_2}
# Commit B. y/{a_1,b_1}, z/{a_2,b_2}
#
# w/o dir-rename detection: y/{a_1,b_1,e_2}, z/{a_2,b_2}, x/e_1
# Currently expected: <same>
# Scary: y/{a_1,b_1}, z/{a_2,b_2}, CONFLICT(add/add, e_1 vs. e_2)
# Optimal: y/{a_1,b_1,e_1}, z/{a_2,b_2,e_2}
#
# Note: Very similar to 8a, except instead of 'e' and 'f' in directories x and
# y, both are named 'e'. Without directory rename detection, neither file
# moves directories. Implement directory rename detection suboptimally, and
# you get an add/add conflict, but both files were added in commit A, so this
# is an add/add conflict where one side of history added both files --
# something we can't represent in the index. Obviously, we'd prefer the last
# resolution, but our previous rules are too coarse to allow it. Using both
# the rules from section 4 and section 5 save us from the Scary resolution,
# making us fall back to pre-directory-rename-detection behavior for both
# e_1 and e_2.
test_expect_success '8b-setup: Dual-directory rename, one into the others way, with conflicting filenames' '
test_create_repo 8b &&
(
cd 8b &&
mkdir x &&
mkdir y &&
echo a1 >x/a &&
echo b1 >x/b &&
echo a2 >y/a &&
echo b2 >y/b &&
git add x y &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "O" &&
git branch O &&
git branch A &&
git branch B &&
git checkout A &&
echo e1 >x/e &&
echo e2 >y/e &&
git add x/e y/e &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "A" &&
git checkout B &&
git mv y z &&
git mv x y &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "B"
)
'
test_expect_success '8b-check: Dual-directory rename, one into the others way, with conflicting filenames' '
(
cd 8b &&
git checkout A^0 &&
git merge -s recursive B^0 &&
git ls-files -s >out &&
test_line_count = 6 out &&
git ls-files -u >out &&
test_line_count = 0 out &&
git ls-files -o >out &&
test_line_count = 1 out &&
git rev-parse >actual \
HEAD:y/a HEAD:y/b HEAD:z/a HEAD:z/b HEAD:x/e HEAD:y/e &&
git rev-parse >expect \
O:x/a O:x/b O:y/a O:y/b A:x/e A:y/e &&
test_cmp expect actual
)
'
# Testcase 8c, modify/delete or rename+modify/delete?
# (Related to testcases 5b, 8d, and 9h)
# Commit O: z/{b,c,d}
# Commit A: y/{b,c}
# Commit B: z/{b,c,d_modified,e}
# Expected: y/{b,c,e}, CONFLICT(modify/delete: on z/d)
#
# Note: It could easily be argued that the correct resolution here is
# y/{b,c,e}, CONFLICT(rename/delete: z/d -> y/d vs deleted)
# and that the modifed version of d should be present in y/ after
# the merge, just marked as conflicted. Indeed, I previously did
# argue that. But applying directory renames to the side of
# history where a file is merely modified results in spurious
# rename/rename(1to2) conflicts -- see testcase 9h. See also
# notes in 8d.
test_expect_success '8c-setup: modify/delete or rename+modify/delete?' '
test_create_repo 8c &&
(
cd 8c &&
mkdir z &&
echo b >z/b &&
echo c >z/c &&
test_seq 1 10 >z/d &&
git add z &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "O" &&
git branch O &&
git branch A &&
git branch B &&
git checkout A &&
git rm z/d &&
git mv z y &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "A" &&
git checkout B &&
echo 11 >z/d &&
test_chmod +x z/d &&
echo e >z/e &&
git add z/d z/e &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "B"
)
'
test_expect_success '8c-check: modify/delete or rename+modify/delete' '
(
cd 8c &&
git checkout A^0 &&
test_must_fail git merge -s recursive B^0 >out &&
test_i18ngrep "CONFLICT (modify/delete).* z/d" out &&
git ls-files -s >out &&
test_line_count = 5 out &&
git ls-files -u >out &&
test_line_count = 2 out &&
git ls-files -o >out &&
test_line_count = 1 out &&
git rev-parse >actual \
:0:y/b :0:y/c :0:y/e :1:z/d :3:z/d &&
git rev-parse >expect \
O:z/b O:z/c B:z/e O:z/d B:z/d &&
test_cmp expect actual &&
test_must_fail git rev-parse :2:z/d &&
git ls-files -s z/d | grep ^100755 &&
test_path_is_file z/d &&
test_path_is_missing y/d
)
'
# Testcase 8d, rename/delete...or not?
# (Related to testcase 5b; these may appear slightly inconsistent to users;
# Also related to testcases 7d and 7e)
# Commit O: z/{b,c,d}
# Commit A: y/{b,c}
# Commit B: z/{b,c,d,e}
# Expected: y/{b,c,e}
#
# Note: It would also be somewhat reasonable to resolve this as
# y/{b,c,e}, CONFLICT(rename/delete: x/d -> y/d or deleted)
#
# In this case, I'm leaning towards: commit A was the one that deleted z/d
# and it did the rename of z to y, so the two "conflicts" (rename vs.
# delete) are both coming from commit A, which is illogical. Conflicts
# during merging are supposed to be about opposite sides doing things
# differently.
test_expect_success '8d-setup: rename/delete...or not?' '
test_create_repo 8d &&
(
cd 8d &&
mkdir z &&
echo b >z/b &&
echo c >z/c &&
test_seq 1 10 >z/d &&
git add z &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "O" &&
git branch O &&
git branch A &&
git branch B &&
git checkout A &&
git rm z/d &&
git mv z y &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "A" &&
git checkout B &&
echo e >z/e &&
git add z/e &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "B"
)
'
test_expect_success '8d-check: rename/delete...or not?' '
(
cd 8d &&
git checkout A^0 &&
git merge -s recursive B^0 &&
git ls-files -s >out &&
test_line_count = 3 out &&
git rev-parse >actual \
HEAD:y/b HEAD:y/c HEAD:y/e &&
git rev-parse >expect \
O:z/b O:z/c B:z/e &&
test_cmp expect actual
)
'
# Testcase 8e, Both sides rename, one side adds to original directory
# Commit O: z/{b,c}
# Commit A: y/{b,c}
# Commit B: w/{b,c}, z/d
#
# Possible Resolutions:
# w/o dir-rename detection: z/d, CONFLICT(z/b -> y/b vs. w/b),
# CONFLICT(z/c -> y/c vs. w/c)
# Currently expected: y/d, CONFLICT(z/b -> y/b vs. w/b),
# CONFLICT(z/c -> y/c vs. w/c)
# Optimal: ??
#
# Notes: In commit A, directory z got renamed to y. In commit B, directory z
# did NOT get renamed; the directory is still present; instead it is
# considered to have just renamed a subset of paths in directory z
# elsewhere. Therefore, the directory rename done in commit A to z/
# applies to z/d and maps it to y/d.
#
# It's possible that users would get confused about this, but what
# should we do instead? Silently leaving at z/d seems just as bad or
# maybe even worse. Perhaps we could print a big warning about z/d
# and how we're moving to y/d in this case, but when I started thinking
# about the ramifications of doing that, I didn't know how to rule out
# that opening other weird edge and corner cases so I just punted.
test_expect_success '8e-setup: Both sides rename, one side adds to original directory' '
test_create_repo 8e &&
(
cd 8e &&
mkdir z &&
echo b >z/b &&
echo c >z/c &&
git add z &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "O" &&
git branch O &&
git branch A &&
git branch B &&
git checkout A &&
git mv z y &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "A" &&
git checkout B &&
git mv z w &&
mkdir z &&
echo d >z/d &&
git add z/d &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "B"
)
'
test_expect_success '8e-check: Both sides rename, one side adds to original directory' '
(
cd 8e &&
git checkout A^0 &&
test_must_fail git merge -s recursive B^0 >out 2>err &&
test_i18ngrep CONFLICT.*rename/rename.*z/c.*y/c.*w/c out &&
test_i18ngrep CONFLICT.*rename/rename.*z/b.*y/b.*w/b out &&
git ls-files -s >out &&
test_line_count = 7 out &&
git ls-files -u >out &&
test_line_count = 6 out &&
git ls-files -o >out &&
test_line_count = 2 out &&
git rev-parse >actual \
:1:z/b :2:y/b :3:w/b :1:z/c :2:y/c :3:w/c :0:y/d &&
git rev-parse >expect \
O:z/b O:z/b O:z/b O:z/c O:z/c O:z/c B:z/d &&
test_cmp expect actual &&
git hash-object >actual \
y/b w/b y/c w/c &&
git rev-parse >expect \
O:z/b O:z/b O:z/c O:z/c &&
test_cmp expect actual &&
test_path_is_missing z/b &&
test_path_is_missing z/c
)
'
###########################################################################
# SECTION 9: Other testcases
#
# This section consists of miscellaneous testcases I thought of during
# the implementation which round out the testing.
###########################################################################
# Testcase 9a, Inner renamed directory within outer renamed directory
# (Related to testcase 1f)
# Commit O: z/{b,c,d/{e,f,g}}
# Commit A: y/{b,c}, x/w/{e,f,g}
# Commit B: z/{b,c,d/{e,f,g,h},i}
# Expected: y/{b,c,i}, x/w/{e,f,g,h}
# NOTE: The only reason this one is interesting is because when a directory
# is split into multiple other directories, we determine by the weight
# of which one had the most paths going to it. A naive implementation
# of that could take the new file in commit B at z/i to x/w/i or x/i.
test_expect_success '9a-setup: Inner renamed directory within outer renamed directory' '
test_create_repo 9a &&
(
cd 9a &&
mkdir -p z/d &&
echo b >z/b &&
echo c >z/c &&
echo e >z/d/e &&
echo f >z/d/f &&
echo g >z/d/g &&
git add z &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "O" &&
git branch O &&
git branch A &&
git branch B &&
git checkout A &&
mkdir x &&
git mv z/d x/w &&
git mv z y &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "A" &&
git checkout B &&
echo h >z/d/h &&
echo i >z/i &&
git add z &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "B"
)
'
test_expect_success '9a-check: Inner renamed directory within outer renamed directory' '
(
cd 9a &&
git checkout A^0 &&
git merge -s recursive B^0 &&
git ls-files -s >out &&
test_line_count = 7 out &&
git ls-files -u >out &&
test_line_count = 0 out &&
git ls-files -o >out &&
test_line_count = 1 out &&
git rev-parse >actual \
HEAD:y/b HEAD:y/c HEAD:y/i &&
git rev-parse >expect \
O:z/b O:z/c B:z/i &&
test_cmp expect actual &&
git rev-parse >actual \
HEAD:x/w/e HEAD:x/w/f HEAD:x/w/g HEAD:x/w/h &&
git rev-parse >expect \
O:z/d/e O:z/d/f O:z/d/g B:z/d/h &&
test_cmp expect actual
)
'
# Testcase 9b, Transitive rename with content merge
# (Related to testcase 1c)
# Commit O: z/{b,c}, x/d_1
# Commit A: y/{b,c}, x/d_2
# Commit B: z/{b,c,d_3}
# Expected: y/{b,c,d_merged}
test_expect_success '9b-setup: Transitive rename with content merge' '
test_create_repo 9b &&
(
cd 9b &&
mkdir z &&
echo b >z/b &&
echo c >z/c &&
mkdir x &&
test_seq 1 10 >x/d &&
git add z x &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "O" &&
git branch O &&
git branch A &&
git branch B &&
git checkout A &&
git mv z y &&
test_seq 1 11 >x/d &&
git add x/d &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "A" &&
git checkout B &&
test_seq 0 10 >x/d &&
git mv x/d z/d &&
git add z/d &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "B"
)
'
test_expect_success '9b-check: Transitive rename with content merge' '
(
cd 9b &&
git checkout A^0 &&
git merge -s recursive B^0 &&
git ls-files -s >out &&
test_line_count = 3 out &&
test_seq 0 11 >expected &&
test_cmp expected y/d &&
git add expected &&
git rev-parse >actual \
HEAD:y/b HEAD:y/c HEAD:y/d &&
git rev-parse >expect \
O:z/b O:z/c :0:expected &&
test_cmp expect actual &&
test_must_fail git rev-parse HEAD:x/d &&
test_must_fail git rev-parse HEAD:z/d &&
test_path_is_missing z/d &&
test $(git rev-parse HEAD:y/d) != $(git rev-parse O:x/d) &&
test $(git rev-parse HEAD:y/d) != $(git rev-parse A:x/d) &&
test $(git rev-parse HEAD:y/d) != $(git rev-parse B:z/d)
)
'
# Testcase 9c, Doubly transitive rename?
# (Related to testcase 1c, 7e, and 9d)
# Commit O: z/{b,c}, x/{d,e}, w/f
# Commit A: y/{b,c}, x/{d,e,f,g}
# Commit B: z/{b,c,d,e}, w/f
# Expected: y/{b,c,d,e}, x/{f,g}
#
# NOTE: x/f and x/g may be slightly confusing here. The rename from w/f to
# x/f is clear. Let's look beyond that. Here's the logic:
# Commit B renamed x/ -> z/
# Commit A renamed z/ -> y/
# So, we could possibly further rename x/f to z/f to y/f, a doubly
# transient rename. However, where does it end? We can chain these
# indefinitely (see testcase 9d). What if there is a D/F conflict
# at z/f/ or y/f/? Or just another file conflict at one of those
# paths? In the case of an N-long chain of transient renamings,
# where do we "abort" the rename at? Can the user make sense of
# the resulting conflict and resolve it?
#
# To avoid this confusion I use the simple rule that if the other side
# of history did a directory rename to a path that your side renamed
# away, then ignore that particular rename from the other side of
# history for any implicit directory renames.
test_expect_success '9c-setup: Doubly transitive rename?' '
test_create_repo 9c &&
(
cd 9c &&
mkdir z &&
echo b >z/b &&
echo c >z/c &&
mkdir x &&
echo d >x/d &&
echo e >x/e &&
mkdir w &&
echo f >w/f &&
git add z x w &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "O" &&
git branch O &&
git branch A &&
git branch B &&
git checkout A &&
git mv z y &&
git mv w/f x/ &&
echo g >x/g &&
git add x/g &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "A" &&
git checkout B &&
git mv x/d z/d &&
git mv x/e z/e &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "B"
)
'
test_expect_success '9c-check: Doubly transitive rename?' '
(
cd 9c &&
git checkout A^0 &&
git merge -s recursive B^0 >out &&
test_i18ngrep "WARNING: Avoiding applying x -> z rename to x/f" out &&
git ls-files -s >out &&
test_line_count = 6 out &&
git ls-files -o >out &&
test_line_count = 1 out &&
git rev-parse >actual \
HEAD:y/b HEAD:y/c HEAD:y/d HEAD:y/e HEAD:x/f HEAD:x/g &&
git rev-parse >expect \
O:z/b O:z/c O:x/d O:x/e O:w/f A:x/g &&
test_cmp expect actual
)
'
# Testcase 9d, N-fold transitive rename?
# (Related to testcase 9c...and 1c and 7e)
# Commit O: z/a, y/b, x/c, w/d, v/e, u/f
# Commit A: y/{a,b}, w/{c,d}, u/{e,f}
# Commit B: z/{a,t}, x/{b,c}, v/{d,e}, u/f
# Expected: <see NOTE first>
#
# NOTE: z/ -> y/ (in commit A)
# y/ -> x/ (in commit B)
# x/ -> w/ (in commit A)
# w/ -> v/ (in commit B)
# v/ -> u/ (in commit A)
# So, if we add a file to z, say z/t, where should it end up? In u?
# What if there's another file or directory named 't' in one of the
# intervening directories and/or in u itself? Also, shouldn't the
# same logic that places 't' in u/ also move ALL other files to u/?
# What if there are file or directory conflicts in any of them? If
# we attempted to do N-way (N-fold? N-ary? N-uple?) transitive renames
# like this, would the user have any hope of understanding any
# conflicts or how their working tree ended up? I think not, so I'm
# ruling out N-ary transitive renames for N>1.
#
# Therefore our expected result is:
# z/t, y/a, x/b, w/c, u/d, u/e, u/f
# The reason that v/d DOES get transitively renamed to u/d is that u/ isn't
# renamed somewhere. A slightly sub-optimal result, but it uses fairly
# simple rules that are consistent with what we need for all the other
# testcases and simplifies things for the user.
test_expect_success '9d-setup: N-way transitive rename?' '
test_create_repo 9d &&
(
cd 9d &&
mkdir z y x w v u &&
echo a >z/a &&
echo b >y/b &&
echo c >x/c &&
echo d >w/d &&
echo e >v/e &&
echo f >u/f &&
git add z y x w v u &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "O" &&
git branch O &&
git branch A &&
git branch B &&
git checkout A &&
git mv z/a y/ &&
git mv x/c w/ &&
git mv v/e u/ &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "A" &&
git checkout B &&
echo t >z/t &&
git mv y/b x/ &&
git mv w/d v/ &&
git add z/t &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "B"
)
'
test_expect_success '9d-check: N-way transitive rename?' '
(
cd 9d &&
git checkout A^0 &&
git merge -s recursive B^0 >out &&
test_i18ngrep "WARNING: Avoiding applying z -> y rename to z/t" out &&
test_i18ngrep "WARNING: Avoiding applying y -> x rename to y/a" out &&
test_i18ngrep "WARNING: Avoiding applying x -> w rename to x/b" out &&
test_i18ngrep "WARNING: Avoiding applying w -> v rename to w/c" out &&
git ls-files -s >out &&
test_line_count = 7 out &&
git ls-files -o >out &&
test_line_count = 1 out &&
git rev-parse >actual \
HEAD:z/t \
HEAD:y/a HEAD:x/b HEAD:w/c \
HEAD:u/d HEAD:u/e HEAD:u/f &&
git rev-parse >expect \
B:z/t \
O:z/a O:y/b O:x/c \
O:w/d O:v/e A:u/f &&
test_cmp expect actual
)
'
# Testcase 9e, N-to-1 whammo
# (Related to testcase 9c...and 1c and 7e)
# Commit O: dir1/{a,b}, dir2/{d,e}, dir3/{g,h}, dirN/{j,k}
# Commit A: dir1/{a,b,c,yo}, dir2/{d,e,f,yo}, dir3/{g,h,i,yo}, dirN/{j,k,l,yo}
# Commit B: combined/{a,b,d,e,g,h,j,k}
# Expected: combined/{a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h,i,j,k,l}, CONFLICT(Nto1) warnings,
# dir1/yo, dir2/yo, dir3/yo, dirN/yo
test_expect_success '9e-setup: N-to-1 whammo' '
test_create_repo 9e &&
(
cd 9e &&
mkdir dir1 dir2 dir3 dirN &&
echo a >dir1/a &&
echo b >dir1/b &&
echo d >dir2/d &&
echo e >dir2/e &&
echo g >dir3/g &&
echo h >dir3/h &&
echo j >dirN/j &&
echo k >dirN/k &&
git add dir* &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "O" &&
git branch O &&
git branch A &&
git branch B &&
git checkout A &&
echo c >dir1/c &&
echo yo >dir1/yo &&
echo f >dir2/f &&
echo yo >dir2/yo &&
echo i >dir3/i &&
echo yo >dir3/yo &&
echo l >dirN/l &&
echo yo >dirN/yo &&
git add dir* &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "A" &&
git checkout B &&
git mv dir1 combined &&
git mv dir2/* combined/ &&
git mv dir3/* combined/ &&
git mv dirN/* combined/ &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "B"
)
'
test_expect_success C_LOCALE_OUTPUT '9e-check: N-to-1 whammo' '
(
cd 9e &&
git checkout A^0 &&
test_must_fail git merge -s recursive B^0 >out &&
grep "CONFLICT (implicit dir rename): Cannot map more than one path to combined/yo" out >error_line &&
grep -q dir1/yo error_line &&
grep -q dir2/yo error_line &&
grep -q dir3/yo error_line &&
grep -q dirN/yo error_line &&
git ls-files -s >out &&
test_line_count = 16 out &&
git ls-files -u >out &&
test_line_count = 0 out &&
git ls-files -o >out &&
test_line_count = 2 out &&
git rev-parse >actual \
:0:combined/a :0:combined/b :0:combined/c \
:0:combined/d :0:combined/e :0:combined/f \
:0:combined/g :0:combined/h :0:combined/i \
:0:combined/j :0:combined/k :0:combined/l &&
git rev-parse >expect \
O:dir1/a O:dir1/b A:dir1/c \
O:dir2/d O:dir2/e A:dir2/f \
O:dir3/g O:dir3/h A:dir3/i \
O:dirN/j O:dirN/k A:dirN/l &&
test_cmp expect actual &&
git rev-parse >actual \
:0:dir1/yo :0:dir2/yo :0:dir3/yo :0:dirN/yo &&
git rev-parse >expect \
A:dir1/yo A:dir2/yo A:dir3/yo A:dirN/yo &&
test_cmp expect actual
)
'
# Testcase 9f, Renamed directory that only contained immediate subdirs
# (Related to testcases 1e & 9g)
# Commit O: goal/{a,b}/$more_files
# Commit A: priority/{a,b}/$more_files
# Commit B: goal/{a,b}/$more_files, goal/c
# Expected: priority/{a,b}/$more_files, priority/c
test_expect_success '9f-setup: Renamed directory that only contained immediate subdirs' '
test_create_repo 9f &&
(
cd 9f &&
mkdir -p goal/a &&
mkdir -p goal/b &&
echo foo >goal/a/foo &&
echo bar >goal/b/bar &&
echo baz >goal/b/baz &&
git add goal &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "O" &&
git branch O &&
git branch A &&
git branch B &&
git checkout A &&
git mv goal/ priority &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "A" &&
git checkout B &&
echo c >goal/c &&
git add goal/c &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "B"
)
'
test_expect_success '9f-check: Renamed directory that only contained immediate subdirs' '
(
cd 9f &&
git checkout A^0 &&
git merge -s recursive B^0 &&
git ls-files -s >out &&
test_line_count = 4 out &&
git rev-parse >actual \
HEAD:priority/a/foo \
HEAD:priority/b/bar \
HEAD:priority/b/baz \
HEAD:priority/c &&
git rev-parse >expect \
O:goal/a/foo \
O:goal/b/bar \
O:goal/b/baz \
B:goal/c &&
test_cmp expect actual &&
test_must_fail git rev-parse HEAD:goal/c
)
'
# Testcase 9g, Renamed directory that only contained immediate subdirs, immediate subdirs renamed
# (Related to testcases 1e & 9f)
# Commit O: goal/{a,b}/$more_files
# Commit A: priority/{alpha,bravo}/$more_files
# Commit B: goal/{a,b}/$more_files, goal/c
# Expected: priority/{alpha,bravo}/$more_files, priority/c
test_expect_success '9g-setup: Renamed directory that only contained immediate subdirs, immediate subdirs renamed' '
test_create_repo 9g &&
(
cd 9g &&
mkdir -p goal/a &&
mkdir -p goal/b &&
echo foo >goal/a/foo &&
echo bar >goal/b/bar &&
echo baz >goal/b/baz &&
git add goal &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "O" &&
git branch O &&
git branch A &&
git branch B &&
git checkout A &&
mkdir priority &&
git mv goal/a/ priority/alpha &&
git mv goal/b/ priority/beta &&
rmdir goal/ &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "A" &&
git checkout B &&
echo c >goal/c &&
git add goal/c &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "B"
)
'
test_expect_failure '9g-check: Renamed directory that only contained immediate subdirs, immediate subdirs renamed' '
(
cd 9g &&
git checkout A^0 &&
git merge -s recursive B^0 &&
git ls-files -s >out &&
test_line_count = 4 out &&
git rev-parse >actual \
HEAD:priority/alpha/foo \
HEAD:priority/beta/bar \
HEAD:priority/beta/baz \
HEAD:priority/c &&
git rev-parse >expect \
O:goal/a/foo \
O:goal/b/bar \
O:goal/b/baz \
B:goal/c &&
test_cmp expect actual &&
test_must_fail git rev-parse HEAD:goal/c
)
'
# Testcase 9h, Avoid implicit rename if involved as source on other side
# (Extremely closely related to testcase 3a)
# Commit O: z/{b,c,d_1}
# Commit A: z/{b,c,d_2}
# Commit B: y/{b,c}, x/d_1
# Expected: y/{b,c}, x/d_2
# NOTE: If we applied the z/ -> y/ rename to z/d, then we'd end up with
# a rename/rename(1to2) conflict (z/d -> y/d vs. x/d)
test_expect_success '9h-setup: Avoid dir rename on merely modified path' '
test_create_repo 9h &&
(
cd 9h &&
mkdir z &&
echo b >z/b &&
echo c >z/c &&
printf "1\n2\n3\n4\n5\n6\n7\n8\nd\n" >z/d &&
git add z &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "O" &&
git branch O &&
git branch A &&
git branch B &&
git checkout A &&
test_tick &&
echo more >>z/d &&
git add z/d &&
git commit -m "A" &&
git checkout B &&
mkdir y &&
mkdir x &&
git mv z/b y/ &&
git mv z/c y/ &&
git mv z/d x/ &&
rmdir z &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "B"
)
'
test_expect_success '9h-check: Avoid dir rename on merely modified path' '
(
cd 9h &&
git checkout A^0 &&
git merge -s recursive B^0 &&
git ls-files -s >out &&
test_line_count = 3 out &&
git rev-parse >actual \
HEAD:y/b HEAD:y/c HEAD:x/d &&
git rev-parse >expect \
O:z/b O:z/c A:z/d &&
test_cmp expect actual
)
'
###########################################################################
# Rules suggested by section 9:
#
# If the other side of history did a directory rename to a path that your
# side renamed away, then ignore that particular rename from the other
# side of history for any implicit directory renames.
###########################################################################
###########################################################################
# SECTION 10: Handling untracked files
#
# unpack_trees(), upon which the recursive merge algorithm is based, aborts
# the operation if untracked or dirty files would be deleted or overwritten
# by the merge. Unfortunately, unpack_trees() does not understand renames,
# and if it doesn't abort, then it muddies up the working directory before
# we even get to the point of detecting renames, so we need some special
# handling, at least in the case of directory renames.
###########################################################################
# Testcase 10a, Overwrite untracked: normal rename/delete
# Commit O: z/{b,c_1}
# Commit A: z/b + untracked z/c + untracked z/d
# Commit B: z/{b,d_1}
# Expected: Aborted Merge +
# ERROR_MSG(untracked working tree files would be overwritten by merge)
test_expect_success '10a-setup: Overwrite untracked with normal rename/delete' '
test_create_repo 10a &&
(
cd 10a &&
mkdir z &&
echo b >z/b &&
echo c >z/c &&
git add z &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "O" &&
git branch O &&
git branch A &&
git branch B &&
git checkout A &&
git rm z/c &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "A" &&
git checkout B &&
git mv z/c z/d &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "B"
)
'
test_expect_success '10a-check: Overwrite untracked with normal rename/delete' '
(
cd 10a &&
git checkout A^0 &&
echo very >z/c &&
echo important >z/d &&
test_must_fail git merge -s recursive B^0 >out 2>err &&
test_i18ngrep "The following untracked working tree files would be overwritten by merge" err &&
git ls-files -s >out &&
test_line_count = 1 out &&
git ls-files -o >out &&
test_line_count = 4 out &&
echo very >expect &&
test_cmp expect z/c &&
echo important >expect &&
test_cmp expect z/d &&
git rev-parse HEAD:z/b >actual &&
git rev-parse O:z/b >expect &&
test_cmp expect actual
)
'
# Testcase 10b, Overwrite untracked: dir rename + delete
# Commit O: z/{b,c_1}
# Commit A: y/b + untracked y/{c,d,e}
# Commit B: z/{b,d_1,e}
# Expected: Failed Merge; y/b + untracked y/c + untracked y/d on disk +
# z/c_1 -> z/d_1 rename recorded at stage 3 for y/d +
# ERROR_MSG(refusing to lose untracked file at 'y/d')
test_expect_success '10b-setup: Overwrite untracked with dir rename + delete' '
test_create_repo 10b &&
(
cd 10b &&
mkdir z &&
echo b >z/b &&
echo c >z/c &&
git add z &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "O" &&
git branch O &&
git branch A &&
git branch B &&
git checkout A &&
git rm z/c &&
git mv z/ y/ &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "A" &&
git checkout B &&
git mv z/c z/d &&
echo e >z/e &&
git add z/e &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "B"
)
'
test_expect_success '10b-check: Overwrite untracked with dir rename + delete' '
(
cd 10b &&
git checkout A^0 &&
echo very >y/c &&
echo important >y/d &&
echo contents >y/e &&
test_must_fail git merge -s recursive B^0 >out 2>err &&
test_i18ngrep "CONFLICT (rename/delete).*Version B\^0 of y/d left in tree at y/d~B\^0" out &&
test_i18ngrep "Error: Refusing to lose untracked file at y/e; writing to y/e~B\^0 instead" out &&
git ls-files -s >out &&
test_line_count = 3 out &&
git ls-files -u >out &&
test_line_count = 2 out &&
git ls-files -o >out &&
test_line_count = 5 out &&
git rev-parse >actual \
:0:y/b :3:y/d :3:y/e &&
git rev-parse >expect \
O:z/b O:z/c B:z/e &&
test_cmp expect actual &&
echo very >expect &&
test_cmp expect y/c &&
echo important >expect &&
test_cmp expect y/d &&
echo contents >expect &&
test_cmp expect y/e
)
'
# Testcase 10c, Overwrite untracked: dir rename/rename(1to2)
# Commit O: z/{a,b}, x/{c,d}
# Commit A: y/{a,b}, w/c, x/d + different untracked y/c
# Commit B: z/{a,b,c}, x/d
# Expected: Failed Merge; y/{a,b} + x/d + untracked y/c +
# CONFLICT(rename/rename) x/c -> w/c vs y/c +
# y/c~B^0 +
# ERROR_MSG(Refusing to lose untracked file at y/c)
test_expect_success '10c-setup: Overwrite untracked with dir rename/rename(1to2)' '
test_create_repo 10c &&
(
cd 10c &&
mkdir z x &&
echo a >z/a &&
echo b >z/b &&
echo c >x/c &&
echo d >x/d &&
git add z x &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "O" &&
git branch O &&
git branch A &&
git branch B &&
git checkout A &&
mkdir w &&
git mv x/c w/c &&
git mv z/ y/ &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "A" &&
git checkout B &&
git mv x/c z/ &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "B"
)
'
test_expect_success '10c-check: Overwrite untracked with dir rename/rename(1to2)' '
(
cd 10c &&
git checkout A^0 &&
echo important >y/c &&
test_must_fail git merge -s recursive B^0 >out 2>err &&
test_i18ngrep "CONFLICT (rename/rename)" out &&
test_i18ngrep "Refusing to lose untracked file at y/c; adding as y/c~B\^0 instead" out &&
git ls-files -s >out &&
test_line_count = 6 out &&
git ls-files -u >out &&
test_line_count = 3 out &&
git ls-files -o >out &&
test_line_count = 3 out &&
git rev-parse >actual \
:0:y/a :0:y/b :0:x/d :1:x/c :2:w/c :3:y/c &&
git rev-parse >expect \
O:z/a O:z/b O:x/d O:x/c O:x/c O:x/c &&
test_cmp expect actual &&
git hash-object y/c~B^0 >actual &&
git rev-parse O:x/c >expect &&
test_cmp expect actual &&
echo important >expect &&
test_cmp expect y/c
)
'
# Testcase 10d, Delete untracked w/ dir rename/rename(2to1)
# Commit O: z/{a,b,c_1}, x/{d,e,f_2}
# Commit A: y/{a,b}, x/{d,e,f_2,wham_1} + untracked y/wham
# Commit B: z/{a,b,c_1,wham_2}, y/{d,e}
# Expected: Failed Merge; y/{a,b,d,e} + untracked y/{wham,wham~B^0,wham~HEAD}+
# CONFLICT(rename/rename) z/c_1 vs x/f_2 -> y/wham
# ERROR_MSG(Refusing to lose untracked file at y/wham)
test_expect_success '10d-setup: Delete untracked with dir rename/rename(2to1)' '
test_create_repo 10d &&
(
cd 10d &&
mkdir z x &&
echo a >z/a &&
echo b >z/b &&
echo c >z/c &&
echo d >x/d &&
echo e >x/e &&
echo f >x/f &&
git add z x &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "O" &&
git branch O &&
git branch A &&
git branch B &&
git checkout A &&
git mv z/c x/wham &&
git mv z/ y/ &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "A" &&
git checkout B &&
git mv x/f z/wham &&
git mv x/ y/ &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "B"
)
'
test_expect_success '10d-check: Delete untracked with dir rename/rename(2to1)' '
(
cd 10d &&
git checkout A^0 &&
echo important >y/wham &&
test_must_fail git merge -s recursive B^0 >out 2>err &&
test_i18ngrep "CONFLICT (rename/rename)" out &&
test_i18ngrep "Refusing to lose untracked file at y/wham" out &&
git ls-files -s >out &&
test_line_count = 6 out &&
git ls-files -u >out &&
test_line_count = 2 out &&
git ls-files -o >out &&
test_line_count = 4 out &&
git rev-parse >actual \
:0:y/a :0:y/b :0:y/d :0:y/e :2:y/wham :3:y/wham &&
git rev-parse >expect \
O:z/a O:z/b O:x/d O:x/e O:z/c O:x/f &&
test_cmp expect actual &&
test_must_fail git rev-parse :1:y/wham &&
echo important >expect &&
test_cmp expect y/wham &&
git hash-object >actual \
y/wham~B^0 y/wham~HEAD &&
git rev-parse >expect \
O:x/f O:z/c &&
test_cmp expect actual
)
'
# Testcase 10e, Does git complain about untracked file that's not in the way?
# Commit O: z/{a,b}
# Commit A: y/{a,b} + untracked z/c
# Commit B: z/{a,b,c}
# Expected: y/{a,b,c} + untracked z/c
test_expect_success '10e-setup: Does git complain about untracked file that is not really in the way?' '
test_create_repo 10e &&
(
cd 10e &&
mkdir z &&
echo a >z/a &&
echo b >z/b &&
git add z &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "O" &&
git branch O &&
git branch A &&
git branch B &&
git checkout A &&
git mv z/ y/ &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "A" &&
git checkout B &&
echo c >z/c &&
git add z/c &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "B"
)
'
test_expect_failure '10e-check: Does git complain about untracked file that is not really in the way?' '
(
cd 10e &&
git checkout A^0 &&
mkdir z &&
echo random >z/c &&
git merge -s recursive B^0 >out 2>err &&
test_i18ngrep ! "following untracked working tree files would be overwritten by merge" err &&
git ls-files -s >out &&
test_line_count = 3 out &&
git ls-files -u >out &&
test_line_count = 0 out &&
git ls-files -o >out &&
test_line_count = 3 out &&
git rev-parse >actual \
:0:y/a :0:y/b :0:y/c &&
git rev-parse >expect \
O:z/a O:z/b B:z/c &&
test_cmp expect actual &&
echo random >expect &&
test_cmp expect z/c
)
'
###########################################################################
# SECTION 11: Handling dirty (not up-to-date) files
#
# unpack_trees(), upon which the recursive merge algorithm is based, aborts
# the operation if untracked or dirty files would be deleted or overwritten
# by the merge. Unfortunately, unpack_trees() does not understand renames,
# and if it doesn't abort, then it muddies up the working directory before
# we even get to the point of detecting renames, so we need some special
# handling. This was true even of normal renames, but there are additional
# codepaths that need special handling with directory renames. Add
# testcases for both renamed-by-directory-rename-detection and standard
# rename cases.
###########################################################################
# Testcase 11a, Avoid losing dirty contents with simple rename
# Commit O: z/{a,b_v1},
# Commit A: z/{a,c_v1}, and z/c_v1 has uncommitted mods
# Commit B: z/{a,b_v2}
# Expected: ERROR_MSG(Refusing to lose dirty file at z/c) +
# z/a, staged version of z/c has sha1sum matching B:z/b_v2,
# z/c~HEAD with contents of B:z/b_v2,
# z/c with uncommitted mods on top of A:z/c_v1
test_expect_success '11a-setup: Avoid losing dirty contents with simple rename' '
test_create_repo 11a &&
(
cd 11a &&
mkdir z &&
echo a >z/a &&
test_seq 1 10 >z/b &&
git add z &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "O" &&
git branch O &&
git branch A &&
git branch B &&
git checkout A &&
git mv z/b z/c &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "A" &&
git checkout B &&
echo 11 >>z/b &&
git add z/b &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "B"
)
'
test_expect_success '11a-check: Avoid losing dirty contents with simple rename' '
(
cd 11a &&
git checkout A^0 &&
echo stuff >>z/c &&
test_must_fail git merge -s recursive B^0 >out 2>err &&
test_i18ngrep "Refusing to lose dirty file at z/c" out &&
test_seq 1 10 >expected &&
echo stuff >>expected &&
test_cmp expected z/c &&
git ls-files -s >out &&
test_line_count = 2 out &&
git ls-files -u >out &&
test_line_count = 1 out &&
git ls-files -o >out &&
test_line_count = 4 out &&
git rev-parse >actual \
:0:z/a :2:z/c &&
git rev-parse >expect \
O:z/a B:z/b &&
test_cmp expect actual &&
git hash-object z/c~HEAD >actual &&
git rev-parse B:z/b >expect &&
test_cmp expect actual
)
'
# Testcase 11b, Avoid losing dirty file involved in directory rename
# Commit O: z/a, x/{b,c_v1}
# Commit A: z/{a,c_v1}, x/b, and z/c_v1 has uncommitted mods
# Commit B: y/a, x/{b,c_v2}
# Expected: y/{a,c_v2}, x/b, z/c_v1 with uncommitted mods untracked,
# ERROR_MSG(Refusing to lose dirty file at z/c)
test_expect_success '11b-setup: Avoid losing dirty file involved in directory rename' '
test_create_repo 11b &&
(
cd 11b &&
mkdir z x &&
echo a >z/a &&
echo b >x/b &&
test_seq 1 10 >x/c &&
git add z x &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "O" &&
git branch O &&
git branch A &&
git branch B &&
git checkout A &&
git mv x/c z/c &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "A" &&
git checkout B &&
git mv z y &&
echo 11 >>x/c &&
git add x/c &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "B"
)
'
test_expect_success '11b-check: Avoid losing dirty file involved in directory rename' '
(
cd 11b &&
git checkout A^0 &&
echo stuff >>z/c &&
git merge -s recursive B^0 >out 2>err &&
test_i18ngrep "Refusing to lose dirty file at z/c" out &&
grep -q stuff z/c &&
test_seq 1 10 >expected &&
echo stuff >>expected &&
test_cmp expected z/c &&
git ls-files -s >out &&
test_line_count = 3 out &&
git ls-files -u >out &&
test_line_count = 0 out &&
git ls-files -m >out &&
test_line_count = 0 out &&
git ls-files -o >out &&
test_line_count = 4 out &&
git rev-parse >actual \
:0:x/b :0:y/a :0:y/c &&
git rev-parse >expect \
O:x/b O:z/a B:x/c &&
test_cmp expect actual &&
git hash-object y/c >actual &&
git rev-parse B:x/c >expect &&
test_cmp expect actual
)
'
# Testcase 11c, Avoid losing not-up-to-date with rename + D/F conflict
# Commit O: y/a, x/{b,c_v1}
# Commit A: y/{a,c_v1}, x/b, and y/c_v1 has uncommitted mods
# Commit B: y/{a,c/d}, x/{b,c_v2}
# Expected: Abort_msg("following files would be overwritten by merge") +
# y/c left untouched (still has uncommitted mods)
test_expect_success '11c-setup: Avoid losing not-uptodate with rename + D/F conflict' '
test_create_repo 11c &&
(
cd 11c &&
mkdir y x &&
echo a >y/a &&
echo b >x/b &&
test_seq 1 10 >x/c &&
git add y x &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "O" &&
git branch O &&
git branch A &&
git branch B &&
git checkout A &&
git mv x/c y/c &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "A" &&
git checkout B &&
mkdir y/c &&
echo d >y/c/d &&
echo 11 >>x/c &&
git add x/c y/c/d &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "B"
)
'
test_expect_success '11c-check: Avoid losing not-uptodate with rename + D/F conflict' '
(
cd 11c &&
git checkout A^0 &&
echo stuff >>y/c &&
test_must_fail git merge -s recursive B^0 >out 2>err &&
test_i18ngrep "following files would be overwritten by merge" err &&
grep -q stuff y/c &&
test_seq 1 10 >expected &&
echo stuff >>expected &&
test_cmp expected y/c &&
git ls-files -s >out &&
test_line_count = 3 out &&
git ls-files -u >out &&
test_line_count = 0 out &&
git ls-files -m >out &&
test_line_count = 1 out &&
git ls-files -o >out &&
test_line_count = 3 out
)
'
# Testcase 11d, Avoid losing not-up-to-date with rename + D/F conflict
# Commit O: z/a, x/{b,c_v1}
# Commit A: z/{a,c_v1}, x/b, and z/c_v1 has uncommitted mods
# Commit B: y/{a,c/d}, x/{b,c_v2}
# Expected: D/F: y/c_v2 vs y/c/d) +
# Warning_Msg("Refusing to lose dirty file at z/c) +
# y/{a,c~HEAD,c/d}, x/b, now-untracked z/c_v1 with uncommitted mods
test_expect_success '11d-setup: Avoid losing not-uptodate with rename + D/F conflict' '
test_create_repo 11d &&
(
cd 11d &&
mkdir z x &&
echo a >z/a &&
echo b >x/b &&
test_seq 1 10 >x/c &&
git add z x &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "O" &&
git branch O &&
git branch A &&
git branch B &&
git checkout A &&
git mv x/c z/c &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "A" &&
git checkout B &&
git mv z y &&
mkdir y/c &&
echo d >y/c/d &&
echo 11 >>x/c &&
git add x/c y/c/d &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "B"
)
'
test_expect_success '11d-check: Avoid losing not-uptodate with rename + D/F conflict' '
(
cd 11d &&
git checkout A^0 &&
echo stuff >>z/c &&
test_must_fail git merge -s recursive B^0 >out 2>err &&
test_i18ngrep "Refusing to lose dirty file at z/c" out &&
grep -q stuff z/c &&
test_seq 1 10 >expected &&
echo stuff >>expected &&
test_cmp expected z/c
git ls-files -s >out &&
test_line_count = 4 out &&
git ls-files -u >out &&
test_line_count = 1 out &&
git ls-files -o >out &&
test_line_count = 5 out &&
git rev-parse >actual \
:0:x/b :0:y/a :0:y/c/d :3:y/c &&
git rev-parse >expect \
O:x/b O:z/a B:y/c/d B:x/c &&
test_cmp expect actual &&
git hash-object y/c~HEAD >actual &&
git rev-parse B:x/c >expect &&
test_cmp expect actual
)
'
# Testcase 11e, Avoid deleting not-up-to-date with dir rename/rename(1to2)/add
# Commit O: z/{a,b}, x/{c_1,d}
# Commit A: y/{a,b,c_2}, x/d, w/c_1, and y/c_2 has uncommitted mods
# Commit B: z/{a,b,c_1}, x/d
# Expected: Failed Merge; y/{a,b} + x/d +
# CONFLICT(rename/rename) x/c_1 -> w/c_1 vs y/c_1 +
# ERROR_MSG(Refusing to lose dirty file at y/c)
# y/c~B^0 has O:x/c_1 contents
# y/c~HEAD has A:y/c_2 contents
# y/c has dirty file from before merge
test_expect_success '11e-setup: Avoid deleting not-uptodate with dir rename/rename(1to2)/add' '
test_create_repo 11e &&
(
cd 11e &&
mkdir z x &&
echo a >z/a &&
echo b >z/b &&
echo c >x/c &&
echo d >x/d &&
git add z x &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "O" &&
git branch O &&
git branch A &&
git branch B &&
git checkout A &&
git mv z/ y/ &&
echo different >y/c &&
mkdir w &&
git mv x/c w/ &&
git add y/c &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "A" &&
git checkout B &&
git mv x/c z/ &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "B"
)
'
test_expect_success '11e-check: Avoid deleting not-uptodate with dir rename/rename(1to2)/add' '
(
cd 11e &&
git checkout A^0 &&
echo mods >>y/c &&
test_must_fail git merge -s recursive B^0 >out 2>err &&
test_i18ngrep "CONFLICT (rename/rename)" out &&
test_i18ngrep "Refusing to lose dirty file at y/c" out &&
git ls-files -s >out &&
test_line_count = 7 out &&
git ls-files -u >out &&
test_line_count = 4 out &&
git ls-files -o >out &&
test_line_count = 4 out &&
echo different >expected &&
echo mods >>expected &&
test_cmp expected y/c &&
git rev-parse >actual \
:0:y/a :0:y/b :0:x/d :1:x/c :2:w/c :2:y/c :3:y/c &&
git rev-parse >expect \
O:z/a O:z/b O:x/d O:x/c O:x/c A:y/c O:x/c &&
test_cmp expect actual &&
git hash-object >actual \
y/c~B^0 y/c~HEAD &&
git rev-parse >expect \
O:x/c A:y/c &&
test_cmp expect actual
)
'
# Testcase 11f, Avoid deleting not-up-to-date w/ dir rename/rename(2to1)
# Commit O: z/{a,b}, x/{c_1,d_2}
# Commit A: y/{a,b,wham_1}, x/d_2, except y/wham has uncommitted mods
# Commit B: z/{a,b,wham_2}, x/c_1
# Expected: Failed Merge; y/{a,b} + untracked y/{wham~B^0,wham~B^HEAD} +
# y/wham with dirty changes from before merge +
# CONFLICT(rename/rename) x/c vs x/d -> y/wham
# ERROR_MSG(Refusing to lose dirty file at y/wham)
test_expect_success '11f-setup: Avoid deleting not-uptodate with dir rename/rename(2to1)' '
test_create_repo 11f &&
(
cd 11f &&
mkdir z x &&
echo a >z/a &&
echo b >z/b &&
test_seq 1 10 >x/c &&
echo d >x/d &&
git add z x &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "O" &&
git branch O &&
git branch A &&
git branch B &&
git checkout A &&
git mv z/ y/ &&
git mv x/c y/wham &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "A" &&
git checkout B &&
git mv x/d z/wham &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "B"
)
'
test_expect_success '11f-check: Avoid deleting not-uptodate with dir rename/rename(2to1)' '
(
cd 11f &&
git checkout A^0 &&
echo important >>y/wham &&
test_must_fail git merge -s recursive B^0 >out 2>err &&
test_i18ngrep "CONFLICT (rename/rename)" out &&
test_i18ngrep "Refusing to lose dirty file at y/wham" out &&
git ls-files -s >out &&
test_line_count = 4 out &&
git ls-files -u >out &&
test_line_count = 2 out &&
git ls-files -o >out &&
test_line_count = 4 out &&
test_seq 1 10 >expected &&
echo important >>expected &&
test_cmp expected y/wham &&
test_must_fail git rev-parse :1:y/wham &&
git hash-object >actual \
y/wham~B^0 y/wham~HEAD &&
git rev-parse >expect \
O:x/d O:x/c &&
test_cmp expect actual &&
git rev-parse >actual \
:0:y/a :0:y/b :2:y/wham :3:y/wham &&
git rev-parse >expect \
O:z/a O:z/b O:x/c O:x/d &&
test_cmp expect actual
)
'
###########################################################################
# SECTION 12: Everything else
#
# Tests suggested by others. Tests added after implementation completed
# and submitted. Grab bag.
###########################################################################
# Testcase 12a, Moving one directory hierarchy into another
# (Related to testcase 9a)
# Commit O: node1/{leaf1,leaf2}, node2/{leaf3,leaf4}
# Commit A: node1/{leaf1,leaf2,node2/{leaf3,leaf4}}
# Commit B: node1/{leaf1,leaf2,leaf5}, node2/{leaf3,leaf4,leaf6}
# Expected: node1/{leaf1,leaf2,leaf5,node2/{leaf3,leaf4,leaf6}}
test_expect_success '12a-setup: Moving one directory hierarchy into another' '
test_create_repo 12a &&
(
cd 12a &&
mkdir -p node1 node2 &&
echo leaf1 >node1/leaf1 &&
echo leaf2 >node1/leaf2 &&
echo leaf3 >node2/leaf3 &&
echo leaf4 >node2/leaf4 &&
git add node1 node2 &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "O" &&
git branch O &&
git branch A &&
git branch B &&
git checkout A &&
git mv node2/ node1/ &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "A" &&
git checkout B &&
echo leaf5 >node1/leaf5 &&
echo leaf6 >node2/leaf6 &&
git add node1 node2 &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "B"
)
'
test_expect_success '12a-check: Moving one directory hierarchy into another' '
(
cd 12a &&
git checkout A^0 &&
git merge -s recursive B^0 &&
git ls-files -s >out &&
test_line_count = 6 out &&
git rev-parse >actual \
HEAD:node1/leaf1 HEAD:node1/leaf2 HEAD:node1/leaf5 \
HEAD:node1/node2/leaf3 \
HEAD:node1/node2/leaf4 \
HEAD:node1/node2/leaf6 &&
git rev-parse >expect \
O:node1/leaf1 O:node1/leaf2 B:node1/leaf5 \
O:node2/leaf3 \
O:node2/leaf4 \
B:node2/leaf6 &&
test_cmp expect actual
)
'
# Testcase 12b, Moving two directory hierarchies into each other
# (Related to testcases 1c and 12c)
# Commit O: node1/{leaf1, leaf2}, node2/{leaf3, leaf4}
# Commit A: node1/{leaf1, leaf2, node2/{leaf3, leaf4}}
# Commit B: node2/{leaf3, leaf4, node1/{leaf1, leaf2}}
# Expected: node1/node2/node1/{leaf1, leaf2},
# node2/node1/node2/{leaf3, leaf4}
# NOTE: Without directory renames, we would expect
# node2/node1/{leaf1, leaf2},
# node1/node2/{leaf3, leaf4}
# with directory rename detection, we note that
# commit A renames node2/ -> node1/node2/
# commit B renames node1/ -> node2/node1/
# therefore, applying those directory renames to the initial result
# (making all four paths experience a transitive renaming), yields
# the expected result.
#
# You may ask, is it weird to have two directories rename each other?
# To which, I can do no more than shrug my shoulders and say that
# even simple rules give weird results when given weird inputs.
test_expect_success '12b-setup: Moving one directory hierarchy into another' '
test_create_repo 12b &&
(
cd 12b &&
mkdir -p node1 node2 &&
echo leaf1 >node1/leaf1 &&
echo leaf2 >node1/leaf2 &&
echo leaf3 >node2/leaf3 &&
echo leaf4 >node2/leaf4 &&
git add node1 node2 &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "O" &&
git branch O &&
git branch A &&
git branch B &&
git checkout A &&
git mv node2/ node1/ &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "A" &&
git checkout B &&
git mv node1/ node2/ &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "B"
)
'
test_expect_success '12b-check: Moving one directory hierarchy into another' '
(
cd 12b &&
git checkout A^0 &&
git merge -s recursive B^0 &&
git ls-files -s >out &&
test_line_count = 4 out &&
git rev-parse >actual \
HEAD:node1/node2/node1/leaf1 \
HEAD:node1/node2/node1/leaf2 \
HEAD:node2/node1/node2/leaf3 \
HEAD:node2/node1/node2/leaf4 &&
git rev-parse >expect \
O:node1/leaf1 \
O:node1/leaf2 \
O:node2/leaf3 \
O:node2/leaf4 &&
test_cmp expect actual
)
'
# Testcase 12c, Moving two directory hierarchies into each other w/ content merge
# (Related to testcase 12b)
# Commit O: node1/{ leaf1_1, leaf2_1}, node2/{leaf3_1, leaf4_1}
# Commit A: node1/{ leaf1_2, leaf2_2, node2/{leaf3_2, leaf4_2}}
# Commit B: node2/{node1/{leaf1_3, leaf2_3}, leaf3_3, leaf4_3}
# Expected: Content merge conflicts for each of:
# node1/node2/node1/{leaf1, leaf2},
# node2/node1/node2/{leaf3, leaf4}
# NOTE: This is *exactly* like 12c, except that every path is modified on
# each side of the merge.
test_expect_success '12c-setup: Moving one directory hierarchy into another w/ content merge' '
test_create_repo 12c &&
(
cd 12c &&
mkdir -p node1 node2 &&
printf "1\n2\n3\n4\n5\n6\n7\n8\nleaf1\n" >node1/leaf1 &&
printf "1\n2\n3\n4\n5\n6\n7\n8\nleaf2\n" >node1/leaf2 &&
printf "1\n2\n3\n4\n5\n6\n7\n8\nleaf3\n" >node2/leaf3 &&
printf "1\n2\n3\n4\n5\n6\n7\n8\nleaf4\n" >node2/leaf4 &&
git add node1 node2 &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "O" &&
git branch O &&
git branch A &&
git branch B &&
git checkout A &&
git mv node2/ node1/ &&
for i in `git ls-files`; do echo side A >>$i; done &&
git add -u &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "A" &&
git checkout B &&
git mv node1/ node2/ &&
for i in `git ls-files`; do echo side B >>$i; done &&
git add -u &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "B"
)
'
test_expect_success '12c-check: Moving one directory hierarchy into another w/ content merge' '
(
cd 12c &&
git checkout A^0 &&
test_must_fail git merge -s recursive B^0 &&
git ls-files -u >out &&
test_line_count = 12 out &&
git rev-parse >actual \
:1:node1/node2/node1/leaf1 \
:1:node1/node2/node1/leaf2 \
:1:node2/node1/node2/leaf3 \
:1:node2/node1/node2/leaf4 \
:2:node1/node2/node1/leaf1 \
:2:node1/node2/node1/leaf2 \
:2:node2/node1/node2/leaf3 \
:2:node2/node1/node2/leaf4 \
:3:node1/node2/node1/leaf1 \
:3:node1/node2/node1/leaf2 \
:3:node2/node1/node2/leaf3 \
:3:node2/node1/node2/leaf4 &&
git rev-parse >expect \
O:node1/leaf1 \
O:node1/leaf2 \
O:node2/leaf3 \
O:node2/leaf4 \
A:node1/leaf1 \
A:node1/leaf2 \
A:node1/node2/leaf3 \
A:node1/node2/leaf4 \
B:node2/node1/leaf1 \
B:node2/node1/leaf2 \
B:node2/leaf3 \
B:node2/leaf4 &&
test_cmp expect actual
)
'
test_done
Reference in a new issue View git blame Copy permalink