#!/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_setup_1a () {
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: Simple directory rename detection' '
test_setup_1a &&
(
cd 1a &&
git checkout A^0 &&
git -c merge.directoryRenames=true merge -s recursive B^0 >out &&
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_setup_1b () {
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: Merge a directory with another' '
test_setup_1b &&
(
cd 1b &&
git checkout A^0 &&
git -c merge.directoryRenames=true 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_setup_1c () {
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: Transitive renaming' '
test_setup_1c &&
(
cd 1c &&
git checkout A^0 &&
git -c merge.directoryRenames=true merge -s recursive B^0 >out &&
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_setup_1d () {
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: Directory renames cause a rename/rename(2to1) conflict' '
test_setup_1d &&
(
cd 1d &&
git checkout A^0 &&
test_must_fail git -c merge.directoryRenames=true merge -s recursive B^0 >out &&
test_i18ngrep "CONFLICT (\(.*\)/\1)" 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 = 1 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 that the two-way merge in x/wham is as expected
git cat-file -p :2:x/wham >expect &&
git cat-file -p :3:x/wham >other &&
>empty &&
test_must_fail git merge-file \
-L "HEAD" \
-L "" \
-L "B^0" \
expect empty other &&
test_cmp expect x/wham
)
'
# 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_setup_1e () {
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: Renamed directory, with all files being renamed too' '
test_setup_1e &&
(
cd 1e &&
git checkout A^0 &&
git -c merge.directoryRenames=true 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_setup_1f () {
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: Split a directory into two other directories' '
test_setup_1f &&
(
cd 1f &&
git checkout A^0 &&
git -c merge.directoryRenames=true 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_setup_2a () {
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: Directory split into two on one side, with equal numbers of paths' '
test_setup_2a &&
(
cd 2a &&
git checkout A^0 &&
test_must_fail git -c merge.directoryRenames=true 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_setup_2b () {
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: Directory split into two on one side, with equal numbers of paths' '
test_setup_2b &&
(
cd 2b &&
git checkout A^0 &&
git -c merge.directoryRenames=true 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_setup_3a () {
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: Avoid implicit rename if involved as source on other side' '
test_setup_3a &&
(
cd 3a &&
git checkout A^0 &&
git -c merge.directoryRenames=true 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_setup_3b () {
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: Avoid implicit rename if involved as source on current side' '
test_setup_3b &&
(
cd 3b &&
git checkout A^0 &&
test_must_fail git -c merge.directoryRenames=true 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 commit 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_setup_4a () {
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: Directory split, with original directory still present' '
test_setup_4a &&
(
cd 4a &&
git checkout A^0 &&
git -c merge.directoryRenames=true 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_setup_5a () {
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: Merge directories, other side adds files to original and target' '
test_setup_5a &&
(
cd 5a &&
git checkout A^0 &&
test_must_fail git -c merge.directoryRenames=true 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 normally 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_setup_5b () {
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: Rename/delete in order to get add/add/add conflict' '
test_setup_5b &&
(
cd 5b &&
git checkout A^0 &&
test_must_fail git -c merge.directoryRenames=true 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_setup_5c () {
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: Transitive rename would cause rename/rename/rename/add/add/add' '
test_setup_5c &&
(
cd 5c &&
git checkout A^0 &&
test_must_fail git -c merge.directoryRenames=true 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 = 1 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 \
z/d &&
git rev-parse >expect \
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_setup_5d () {
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: Directory/file/file conflict due to directory rename' '
test_setup_5d &&
(
cd 5d &&
git checkout A^0 &&
test_must_fail git -c merge.directoryRenames=true 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_setup_6a () {
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: Tricky rename/delete' '
test_setup_6a &&
(
cd 6a &&
git checkout A^0 &&
test_must_fail git -c merge.directoryRenames=true 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_setup_6b () {
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: Same rename done on both sides' '
test_setup_6b &&
(
cd 6b &&
git checkout A^0 &&
git -c merge.directoryRenames=true 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_setup_6c () {
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: Rename only done on same side' '
test_setup_6c &&
(
cd 6c &&
git checkout A^0 &&
git -c merge.directoryRenames=true 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_setup_6d () {
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: We do not always want transitive renaming' '
test_setup_6d &&
(
cd 6d &&
git checkout A^0 &&
git -c merge.directoryRenames=true 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_setup_6e () {
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: Add/add from one side' '
test_setup_6e &&
(
cd 6e &&
git checkout A^0 &&
git -c merge.directoryRenames=true 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_setup_7a () {
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: rename-dir vs. rename-dir (NOT split evenly) PLUS add-other-file' '
test_setup_7a &&
(
cd 7a &&
git checkout A^0 &&
test_must_fail git -c merge.directoryRenames=true 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_setup_7b () {
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: rename/rename(2to1), but only due to transitive rename' '
test_setup_7b &&
(
cd 7b &&
git checkout A^0 &&
test_must_fail git -c merge.directoryRenames=true merge -s recursive B^0 >out &&
test_i18ngrep "CONFLICT (\(.*\)/\1)" 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 = 1 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 that the two-way merge in y/d is as expected
git cat-file -p :2:y/d >expect &&
git cat-file -p :3:y/d >other &&
>empty &&
test_must_fail git merge-file \
-L "HEAD" \
-L "" \
-L "B^0" \
expect empty other &&
test_cmp expect y/d
)
'
# 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_setup_7c () {
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: rename/rename(1to...2or3); transitive rename may add complexity' '
test_setup_7c &&
(
cd 7c &&
git checkout A^0 &&
test_must_fail git -c merge.directoryRenames=true 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_setup_7d () {
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: transitive rename involved in rename/delete; how is it reported?' '
test_setup_7d &&
(
cd 7d &&
git checkout A^0 &&
test_must_fail git -c merge.directoryRenames=true 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_setup_7e () {
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: transitive rename in rename/delete AND dirs in the way' '
test_setup_7e &&
(
cd 7e &&
git checkout A^0 &&
test_must_fail git -c merge.directoryRenames=true 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_setup_8a () {
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: Dual-directory rename, one into the others way' '
test_setup_8a &&
(
cd 8a &&
git checkout A^0 &&
git -c merge.directoryRenames=true 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_setup_8b () {
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: Dual-directory rename, one into the others way, with conflicting filenames' '
test_setup_8b &&
(
cd 8b &&
git checkout A^0 &&
git -c merge.directoryRenames=true 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 modified 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_setup_8c () {
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: modify/delete or rename+modify/delete' '
test_setup_8c &&
(
cd 8c &&
git checkout A^0 &&
test_must_fail git -c merge.directoryRenames=true 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_setup_8d () {
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: rename/delete...or not?' '
test_setup_8d &&
(
cd 8d &&
git checkout A^0 &&
git -c merge.directoryRenames=true 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:
# if z not considered renamed: z/d, CONFLICT(z/b -> y/b vs. w/b),
# CONFLICT(z/c -> y/c vs. w/c)
# if z->y rename considered: 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. However, this is much like testcase 6b (where commit B
# moves all the original paths out of z/ but opted to keep d
# within z/). This makes it hard to judge where d should end up.
#
# It's possible that users would get confused about this, but what
# should we do instead? It's not at all clear to me whether z/d or
# y/d or something else is a better resolution here, and other cases
# start getting really tricky, so I just picked one.
test_setup_8e () {
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: Both sides rename, one side adds to original directory' '
test_setup_8e &&
(
cd 8e &&
git checkout A^0 &&
test_must_fail git -c merge.directoryRenames=true 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_setup_9a () {
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: Inner renamed directory within outer renamed directory' '
test_setup_9a &&
(
cd 9a &&
git checkout A^0 &&
git -c merge.directoryRenames=true 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_setup_9b () {
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: Transitive rename with content merge' '
test_setup_9b &&
(
cd 9b &&
git checkout A^0 &&
git -c merge.directoryRenames=true 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_setup_9c () {
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: Doubly transitive rename?' '
test_setup_9c &&
(
cd 9c &&
git checkout A^0 &&
git -c merge.directoryRenames=true 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_setup_9d () {
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: N-way transitive rename?' '
test_setup_9d &&
(
cd 9d &&
git checkout A^0 &&
git -c merge.directoryRenames=true 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_setup_9e () {
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: N-to-1 whammo' '
test_setup_9e &&
(
cd 9e &&
git checkout A^0 &&
test_must_fail git -c merge.directoryRenames=true 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}/$more_files, priority/c
test_setup_9f () {
test_create_repo 9f &&
(
cd 9f &&
mkdir -p goal/a &&
mkdir -p goal/b &&
echo foo >goal/a/foo &&
echo bar >goal/b/bar &&
echo baz >goal/b/baz &&
git add goal &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "O" &&
git branch O &&
git branch A &&
git branch B &&
git checkout A &&
git mv goal/ priority &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "A" &&
git checkout B &&
echo c >goal/c &&
git add goal/c &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "B"
)
}
test_expect_success '9f: Renamed directory that only contained immediate subdirs' '
test_setup_9f &&
(
cd 9f &&
git checkout A^0 &&
git -c merge.directoryRenames=true merge -s recursive B^0 &&
git ls-files -s >out &&
test_line_count = 4 out &&
git rev-parse >actual \
HEAD:priority/a/foo \
HEAD:priority/b/bar \
HEAD:priority/b/baz \
HEAD:priority/c &&
git rev-parse >expect \
O:goal/a/foo \
O:goal/b/bar \
O:goal/b/baz \
B:goal/c &&
test_cmp expect actual &&
test_must_fail git rev-parse HEAD:goal/c
)
'
# Testcase 9g, Renamed directory that only contained immediate subdirs, immediate subdirs renamed
# (Related to testcases 1e & 9f)
# Commit O: goal/{a,b}/$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
# We currently fail this test because the directory renames we detect are
# goal/a/ -> priority/alpha/
# goal/b/ -> priority/bravo/
# We do not detect
# goal/ -> priority/
# because of no files found within goal/, and the fact that "a" != "alpha"
# and "b" != "bravo". But I'm not sure it's really a failure given that
# viewpoint...
test_setup_9g () {
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: Renamed directory that only contained immediate subdirs, immediate subdirs renamed' '
test_setup_9g &&
(
cd 9g &&
git checkout A^0 &&
git -c merge.directoryRenames=true 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_setup_9h () {
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: Avoid dir rename on merely modified path' '
test_setup_9h &&
(
cd 9h &&
git checkout A^0 &&
git -c merge.directoryRenames=true 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_setup_10a () {
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: Overwrite untracked with normal rename/delete' '
test_setup_10a &&
(
cd 10a &&
git checkout A^0 &&
echo very >z/c &&
echo important >z/d &&
test_must_fail git -c merge.directoryRenames=true 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_setup_10b () {
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: Overwrite untracked with dir rename + delete' '
test_setup_10b &&
(
cd 10b &&
git checkout A^0 &&
echo very >y/c &&
echo important >y/d &&
echo contents >y/e &&
test_must_fail git -c merge.directoryRenames=true 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_setup_10c () {
test_create_repo 10c_$1 &&
(
cd 10c_$1 &&
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 '10c1: Overwrite untracked with dir rename/rename(1to2)' '
test_setup_10c 1 &&
(
cd 10c_1 &&
git checkout A^0 &&
echo important >y/c &&
test_must_fail git -c merge.directoryRenames=true 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
)
'
test_expect_success '10c2: Overwrite untracked with dir rename/rename(1to2), other direction' '
test_setup_10c 2 &&
(
cd 10c_2 &&
git reset --hard &&
git clean -fdqx &&
git checkout B^0 &&
mkdir y &&
echo important >y/c &&
test_must_fail git -c merge.directoryRenames=true merge -s recursive A^0 >out 2>err &&
test_i18ngrep "CONFLICT (rename/rename)" out &&
test_i18ngrep "Refusing to lose untracked file at y/c; adding as y/c~HEAD 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 :3:w/c :2: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~HEAD >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~merged}+
# CONFLICT(rename/rename) z/c_1 vs x/f_2 -> y/wham
# ERROR_MSG(Refusing to lose untracked file at y/wham)
test_setup_10d () {
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: Delete untracked with dir rename/rename(2to1)' '
test_setup_10d &&
(
cd 10d &&
git checkout A^0 &&
echo important >y/wham &&
test_must_fail git -c merge.directoryRenames=true 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 = 3 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 &&
# Test that the two-way merge in y/wham~merged is as expected
git cat-file -p :2:y/wham >expect &&
git cat-file -p :3:y/wham >other &&
>empty &&
test_must_fail git merge-file \
-L "HEAD" \
-L "" \
-L "B^0" \
expect empty other &&
test_cmp expect y/wham~merged
)
'
# 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_setup_10e () {
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: Does git complain about untracked file that is not really in the way?' '
test_setup_10e &&
(
cd 10e &&
git checkout A^0 &&
mkdir z &&
echo random >z/c &&
git -c merge.directoryRenames=true 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_setup_11a () {
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: Avoid losing dirty contents with simple rename' '
test_setup_11a &&
(
cd 11a &&
git checkout A^0 &&
echo stuff >>z/c &&
test_must_fail git -c merge.directoryRenames=true 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_setup_11b () {
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: Avoid losing dirty file involved in directory rename' '
test_setup_11b &&
(
cd 11b &&
git checkout A^0 &&
echo stuff >>z/c &&
git -c merge.directoryRenames=true 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_setup_11c () {
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: Avoid losing not-uptodate with rename + D/F conflict' '
test_setup_11c &&
(
cd 11c &&
git checkout A^0 &&
echo stuff >>y/c &&
test_must_fail git -c merge.directoryRenames=true 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_setup_11d () {
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: Avoid losing not-uptodate with rename + D/F conflict' '
test_setup_11d &&
(
cd 11d &&
git checkout A^0 &&
echo stuff >>z/c &&
test_must_fail git -c merge.directoryRenames=true 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_setup_11e () {
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: Avoid deleting not-uptodate with dir rename/rename(1to2)/add' '
test_setup_11e &&
(
cd 11e &&
git checkout A^0 &&
echo mods >>y/c &&
test_must_fail git -c merge.directoryRenames=true 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 = 3 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 &&
# See if y/c~merged has expected contents; requires manually
# doing the expected file merge
git cat-file -p A:y/c >c1 &&
git cat-file -p B:z/c >c2 &&
>empty &&
test_must_fail git merge-file \
-L "HEAD" \
-L "" \
-L "B^0" \
c1 empty c2 &&
test_cmp c1 y/c~merged
)
'
# 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~merged} +
# 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_setup_11f () {
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: Avoid deleting not-uptodate with dir rename/rename(2to1)' '
test_setup_11f &&
(
cd 11f &&
git checkout A^0 &&
echo important >>y/wham &&
test_must_fail git -c merge.directoryRenames=true 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 = 3 out &&
test_seq 1 10 >expected &&
echo important >>expected &&
test_cmp expected y/wham &&
test_must_fail git rev-parse :1:y/wham &&
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 &&
# Test that the two-way merge in y/wham~merged is as expected
git cat-file -p :2:y/wham >expect &&
git cat-file -p :3:y/wham >other &&
>empty &&
test_must_fail git merge-file \
-L "HEAD" \
-L "" \
-L "B^0" \
expect empty other &&
test_cmp expect y/wham~merged
)
'
###########################################################################
# 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_setup_12a () {
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: Moving one directory hierarchy into another' '
test_setup_12a &&
(
cd 12a &&
git checkout A^0 &&
git -c merge.directoryRenames=true 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_setup_12b () {
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: Moving two directory hierarchies into each other' '
test_setup_12b &&
(
cd 12b &&
git checkout A^0 &&
git -c merge.directoryRenames=true 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_setup_12c () {
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: Moving one directory hierarchy into another w/ content merge' '
test_setup_12c &&
(
cd 12c &&
git checkout A^0 &&
test_must_fail git -c merge.directoryRenames=true 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
)
'
# Testcase 12d, Rename/merge of subdirectory into the root
# Commit O: a/b/subdir/foo
# Commit A: subdir/foo
# Commit B: a/b/subdir/foo, a/b/bar
# Expected: subdir/foo, bar
test_setup_12d () {
test_create_repo 12d &&
(
cd 12d &&
mkdir -p a/b/subdir &&
test_commit a/b/subdir/foo &&
git branch O &&
git branch A &&
git branch B &&
git checkout A &&
mkdir subdir &&
git mv a/b/subdir/foo.t subdir/foo.t &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "A" &&
git checkout B &&
test_commit a/b/bar
)
}
test_expect_success '12d: Rename/merge subdir into the root, variant 1' '
test_setup_12d &&
(
cd 12d &&
git checkout A^0 &&
git -c merge.directoryRenames=true merge -s recursive B^0 &&
git ls-files -s >out &&
test_line_count = 2 out &&
git rev-parse >actual \
HEAD:subdir/foo.t HEAD:bar.t &&
git rev-parse >expect \
O:a/b/subdir/foo.t B:a/b/bar.t &&
test_cmp expect actual &&
git hash-object bar.t >actual &&
git rev-parse B:a/b/bar.t >expect &&
test_cmp expect actual &&
test_must_fail git rev-parse HEAD:a/b/subdir/foo.t &&
test_must_fail git rev-parse HEAD:a/b/bar.t &&
test_path_is_missing a/ &&
test_path_is_file bar.t
)
'
# Testcase 12e, Rename/merge of subdirectory into the root
# Commit O: a/b/foo
# Commit A: foo
# Commit B: a/b/foo, a/b/bar
# Expected: foo, bar
test_setup_12e () {
test_create_repo 12e &&
(
cd 12e &&
mkdir -p a/b &&
test_commit a/b/foo &&
git branch O &&
git branch A &&
git branch B &&
git checkout A &&
mkdir subdir &&
git mv a/b/foo.t foo.t &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "A" &&
git checkout B &&
test_commit a/b/bar
)
}
test_expect_success '12e: Rename/merge subdir into the root, variant 2' '
test_setup_12e &&
(
cd 12e &&
git checkout A^0 &&
git -c merge.directoryRenames=true merge -s recursive B^0 &&
git ls-files -s >out &&
test_line_count = 2 out &&
git rev-parse >actual \
HEAD:foo.t HEAD:bar.t &&
git rev-parse >expect \
O:a/b/foo.t B:a/b/bar.t &&
test_cmp expect actual &&
git hash-object bar.t >actual &&
git rev-parse B:a/b/bar.t >expect &&
test_cmp expect actual &&
test_must_fail git rev-parse HEAD:a/b/foo.t &&
test_must_fail git rev-parse HEAD:a/b/bar.t &&
test_path_is_missing a/ &&
test_path_is_file bar.t
)
'
###########################################################################
# SECTION 13: Checking informational and conflict messages
#
# A year after directory rename detection became the default, it was
# instead decided to report conflicts on the pathname on the basis that
# some users may expect the new files added or moved into a directory to
# be unrelated to all the other files in that directory, and thus that
# directory rename detection is unexpected. Test that the messages printed
# match our expectation.
###########################################################################
# Testcase 13a, Basic directory rename with newly added files
# 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}, with notices/conflicts for both y/d and y/e/f
test_setup_13a () {
test_create_repo 13a_$1 &&
(
cd 13a_$1 &&
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 '13a(conflict): messages for newly added files' '
test_setup_13a conflict &&
(
cd 13a_conflict &&
git checkout A^0 &&
test_must_fail git merge -s recursive B^0 >out 2>err &&
test_i18ngrep CONFLICT..file.location.*z/e/f.added.in.B^0.*y/e/f out &&
test_i18ngrep CONFLICT..file.location.*z/d.added.in.B^0.*y/d out &&
git ls-files >paths &&
! grep z/ paths &&
grep "y/[de]" paths &&
test_path_is_missing z/d &&
test_path_is_file y/d &&
test_path_is_missing z/e/f &&
test_path_is_file y/e/f
)
'
test_expect_success '13a(info): messages for newly added files' '
test_setup_13a info &&
(
cd 13a_info &&
git reset --hard &&
git checkout A^0 &&
git -c merge.directoryRenames=true merge -s recursive B^0 >out 2>err &&
test_i18ngrep Path.updated:.*z/e/f.added.in.B^0.*y/e/f out &&
test_i18ngrep Path.updated:.*z/d.added.in.B^0.*y/d out &&
git ls-files >paths &&
! grep z/ paths &&
grep "y/[de]" paths &&
test_path_is_missing z/d &&
test_path_is_file y/d &&
test_path_is_missing z/e/f &&
test_path_is_file y/e/f
)
'
# Testcase 13b, Transitive rename with conflicted content merge and default
# "conflict" setting
# (Related to testcase 1c, 9b)
# 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}, with two conflict messages for y/d,
# one about content, and one about file location
test_setup_13b () {
test_create_repo 13b_$1 &&
(
cd 13b_$1 &&
mkdir x &&
mkdir z &&
test_seq 1 10 >x/d &&
echo b >z/b &&
echo c >z/c &&
git add x z &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "O" &&
git branch O &&
git branch A &&
git branch B &&
git checkout A &&
git mv z y &&
echo 11 >>x/d &&
git add x/d &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "A" &&
git checkout B &&
echo eleven >>x/d &&
git mv x/d z/d &&
git add z/d &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "B"
)
}
test_expect_success '13b(conflict): messages for transitive rename with conflicted content' '
test_setup_13b conflict &&
(
cd 13b_conflict &&
git checkout A^0 &&
test_must_fail git merge -s recursive B^0 >out 2>err &&
test_i18ngrep CONFLICT.*content.*Merge.conflict.in.y/d out &&
test_i18ngrep CONFLICT..file.location.*x/d.renamed.to.z/d.*moved.to.y/d out &&
git ls-files >paths &&
! grep z/ paths &&
grep "y/d" paths &&
test_path_is_missing z/d &&
test_path_is_file y/d
)
'
test_expect_success '13b(info): messages for transitive rename with conflicted content' '
test_setup_13b info &&
(
cd 13b_info &&
git reset --hard &&
git checkout A^0 &&
test_must_fail git -c merge.directoryRenames=true merge -s recursive B^0 >out 2>err &&
test_i18ngrep CONFLICT.*content.*Merge.conflict.in.y/d out &&
test_i18ngrep Path.updated:.*x/d.renamed.to.z/d.in.B^0.*moving.it.to.y/d out &&
git ls-files >paths &&
! grep z/ paths &&
grep "y/d" paths &&
test_path_is_missing z/d &&
test_path_is_file y/d
)
'
# Testcase 13c, Rename/rename(1to1) due to directory rename
# Commit O: z/{b,c}, x/{d,e}
# Commit A: y/{b,c,d}, x/e
# Commit B: z/{b,c,d}, x/e
# Expected: y/{b,c,d}, x/e, with info or conflict messages for d
# A: renamed x/d -> z/d; B: renamed z/ -> y/ AND renamed x/d to y/d
# One could argue A had partial knowledge of what was done with
# d and B had full knowledge, but that's a slippery slope as
# shown in testcase 13d.
test_setup_13c () {
test_create_repo 13c_$1 &&
(
cd 13c_$1 &&
mkdir x &&
mkdir z &&
test_seq 1 10 >x/d &&
echo e >x/e &&
echo b >z/b &&
echo c >z/c &&
git add x z &&
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/d y/ &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "A" &&
git checkout B &&
git mv x/d z/d &&
git add z/d &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "B"
)
}
test_expect_success '13c(conflict): messages for rename/rename(1to1) via transitive rename' '
test_setup_13c conflict &&
(
cd 13c_conflict &&
git checkout A^0 &&
test_must_fail git merge -s recursive B^0 >out 2>err &&
test_i18ngrep CONFLICT..file.location.*x/d.renamed.to.z/d.*moved.to.y/d out &&
git ls-files >paths &&
! grep z/ paths &&
grep "y/d" paths &&
test_path_is_missing z/d &&
test_path_is_file y/d
)
'
test_expect_success '13c(info): messages for rename/rename(1to1) via transitive rename' '
test_setup_13c info &&
(
cd 13c_info &&
git reset --hard &&
git checkout A^0 &&
git -c merge.directoryRenames=true merge -s recursive B^0 >out 2>err &&
test_i18ngrep Path.updated:.*x/d.renamed.to.z/d.in.B^0.*moving.it.to.y/d out &&
git ls-files >paths &&
! grep z/ paths &&
grep "y/d" paths &&
test_path_is_missing z/d &&
test_path_is_file y/d
)
'
# Testcase 13d, Rename/rename(1to1) due to directory rename on both sides
# Commit O: a/{z,y}, b/x, c/w
# Commit A: a/z, b/{y,x}, d/w
# Commit B: a/z, d/x, c/{y,w}
# Expected: a/z, d/{y,x,w} with no file location conflict for x
# Easy cases:
# * z is always in a; so it stays in a.
# * x starts in b, only modified on one side to move into d/
# * w starts in c, only modified on one side to move into d/
# Hard case:
# * A renames a/y to b/y, and B renames b/->d/ => a/y -> d/y
# * B renames a/y to c/y, and A renames c/->d/ => a/y -> d/y
# No conflict in where a/y ends up, so put it in d/y.
test_setup_13d () {
test_create_repo 13d_$1 &&
(
cd 13d_$1 &&
mkdir a &&
mkdir b &&
mkdir c &&
echo z >a/z &&
echo y >a/y &&
echo x >b/x &&
echo w >c/w &&
git add a b c &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "O" &&
git branch O &&
git branch A &&
git branch B &&
git checkout A &&
git mv a/y b/ &&
git mv c/ d/ &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "A" &&
git checkout B &&
git mv a/y c/ &&
git mv b/ d/ &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "B"
)
}
test_expect_success '13d(conflict): messages for rename/rename(1to1) via dual transitive rename' '
test_setup_13d conflict &&
(
cd 13d_conflict &&
git checkout A^0 &&
test_must_fail git merge -s recursive B^0 >out 2>err &&
test_i18ngrep CONFLICT..file.location.*a/y.renamed.to.b/y.*moved.to.d/y out &&
test_i18ngrep CONFLICT..file.location.*a/y.renamed.to.c/y.*moved.to.d/y out &&
git ls-files >paths &&
! grep b/ paths &&
! grep c/ paths &&
grep "d/y" paths &&
test_path_is_missing b/y &&
test_path_is_missing c/y &&
test_path_is_file d/y
)
'
test_expect_success '13d(info): messages for rename/rename(1to1) via dual transitive rename' '
test_setup_13d info &&
(
cd 13d_info &&
git reset --hard &&
git checkout A^0 &&
git -c merge.directoryRenames=true merge -s recursive B^0 >out 2>err &&
test_i18ngrep Path.updated.*a/y.renamed.to.b/y.*moving.it.to.d/y out &&
test_i18ngrep Path.updated.*a/y.renamed.to.c/y.*moving.it.to.d/y out &&
git ls-files >paths &&
! grep b/ paths &&
! grep c/ paths &&
grep "d/y" paths &&
test_path_is_missing b/y &&
test_path_is_missing c/y &&
test_path_is_file d/y
)
'
# Testcase 13e, directory rename in virtual merge base
#
# This testcase has a slightly different setup than all the above cases, in
# order to include a recursive case:
#
# A C
# o - o
# / \ / \
# O o X ?
# \ / \ /
# o o
# B D
#
# Commit O: a/{z,y}
# Commit A: b/{z,y}
# Commit B: a/{z,y,x}
# Commit C: b/{z,y,x}
# Commit D: b/{z,y}, a/x
# Expected: b/{z,y,x} (sort of; see below for why this might not be expected)
#
# NOTES: 'X' represents a virtual merge base. With the default of
# directory rename detection yielding conflicts, merging A and B
# results in a conflict complaining about whether 'x' should be
# under 'a/' or 'b/'. However, when creating the virtual merge
# base 'X', since virtual merge bases need to be written out as a
# tree, we cannot have a conflict, so some resolution has to be
# picked.
#
# In choosing the right resolution, it's worth noting here that
# commits C & D are merges of A & B that choose different
# locations for 'x' (i.e. they resolve the conflict differently),
# and so it would be nice when merging C & D if git could detect
# this difference of opinion and report a conflict. But the only
# way to do so that I can think of would be to have the virtual
# merge base place 'x' in some directory other than either 'a/' or
# 'b/', which seems a little weird -- especially since it'd result
# in a rename/rename(1to2) conflict with a source path that never
# existed in any version.
#
# So, for now, when directory rename detection is set to
# 'conflict' just avoid doing directory rename detection at all in
# the recursive case. This will not allow us to detect a conflict
# in the outer merge for this special kind of setup, but it at
# least avoids hitting a BUG().
#
test_setup_13e () {
test_create_repo 13e &&
(
cd 13e &&
mkdir a &&
echo z >a/z &&
echo y >a/y &&
git add a &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "O" &&
git branch O &&
git branch A &&
git branch B &&
git checkout A &&
git mv a/ b/ &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "A" &&
git checkout B &&
echo x >a/x &&
git add a &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "B" &&
git branch C A &&
git branch D B &&
git checkout C &&
test_must_fail git -c merge.directoryRenames=conflict merge B &&
git add b/x &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "C" &&
git checkout D &&
test_must_fail git -c merge.directoryRenames=conflict merge A &&
git add b/x &&
mkdir a &&
git mv b/x a/x &&
test_tick &&
git commit -m "D"
)
}
test_expect_success '13e: directory rename detection in recursive case' '
test_setup_13e &&
(
cd 13e &&
git checkout --quiet D^0 &&
git -c merge.directoryRenames=conflict merge -s recursive C^0 >out 2>err &&
test_i18ngrep ! CONFLICT out &&
test_i18ngrep ! BUG: err &&
test_i18ngrep ! core.dumped err &&
test_must_be_empty err &&
git ls-files >paths &&
! grep a/x paths &&
grep b/x paths
)
'
test_done
