When a merge result creates a new file, and when our side already has a
file in the path, taking the merge result may clobber the untracked file.
However, the logic to detect this situation was totally the wrong way. We
should complain when the file exists, not when the file does not exist.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
merge-recursive did not support merging trees that have conflicting
changes in submodules they contain, and died. Support it exactly the
same way as how it handles conflicting symbolic link changes --- mark it
as a conflict, take the tentative result from the current side, and
letting the caller resolve the conflict, without dying in merge_file()
function.
Also reword the error message issued when merge_file() has to die
because it sees a tree entry of type it does not support yet.
[jc: fixed up initial draft by Finn Arne Gangstad]
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
When commit ed93b449 changed the script so that it does not
touch untracked working tree file, we forgot that we still
needed to resolve the index entry (otherwise they are left
unmerged).
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
This uses "git-apply --whitespace=strip" to fix whitespace errors that have
crept in to our source files over time. There are a few files that need
to have trailing whitespaces (most notably, test vectors). The results
still passes the test, and build result in Documentation/ area is unchanged.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Would you believe? I edited git-merge-one-file (note the missing ".sh"!)
when I submitted the patch which became commit e2b7008752...
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
The three-way merge complained unconditionally when a path that
does not exist in the index is involved in a merge when it
existed in the working tree. If we are merging an old version
that had that path tracked, but the path is not tracked anymore,
and if we are merging that old version in, the result will be
that the path is not tracked. In that case we should not
complain.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
The only visible change is that git-blame doesn't understand
"--compability" anymore, but it does accept "--compatibility" instead,
which is already documented.
Signed-off-by: Pavel Roskin <proski@gnu.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Some words, e.g., `match', are special to expr(1), and cause strange
parsing effects. Track down all uses of expr and mangle the arguments
so that this isn't a problem.
Signed-off-by: Mark Wooding <mdw@distorted.org.uk>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
This does two things:
- Use new --stage=2 option to create the working tree file with
leading paths and correct permission bits using
checkout-index, as before.
- Make sure we do not confuse "merge" program when the file
being merged has an unfortunate name, '-L'.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Since we do not use git-update-index followed by
git-checkout-index -u to create the half-merged file on
conflicting case anymore, we need to make sure the leading
directories are created here.
Maybe a better solution would be to allow update-index to add to
higher stage, and checkout-index to extract from such, but that
is a change slightly bigger than I would like to have so close
to 1.0, so this should do for now.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
The "update-index followed by checkout-index" chain served two
purposes -- to collapse the index to "our" version, and make
sure that file exists in the working tree. In the recent update
to leave the index unmerged on conflicting path, we wanted to
stop doing the former, but we still need to do the latter (we
allow merging to work in an un-checked-out working tree).
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
9ae2172aed used "rmdir -p"
carelessly, causing the more important "git-update-index
--remove" to be skipped.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
When automerge fails, we used to collapse the path to stage0
from "our" branch, to help "diff-files" users to view the
half-merged state against the current HEAD. Now diff-files has
been taught how to compare with unmerged stage2,leaving them
unmerged is a better thing to do, especially this prevents the
unresolved conflicts to be committed by mistake.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
When the last file in a directory is removed as the result of a
merge, try to rmdir the now-empty directory.
[jc: We probably could use "rmdir -p", but for now we do that by
hand for portability.]
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
If two sides added the same path completely different thing, it is
easier to see the merge pivoting on /dev/null. So check the size of
the common section we have found, and empty it if it is too small.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Unlike the previous round that merged the path added differently
in each branches using emptiness as the base, compute a common
version and use it as input to 'merge' program.
This would show the resulting (still conflicting) file left in
the working tree as:
common file contents...
<<<<<< FILENAME
version from our branch...
======
version from their branch...
>>>>>> .merge_file_XXXXXX
more common file contents...
when both sides added similar contents.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Instead of leaving the path unmerged in a case where each side
adds different version of the same path, attempt to merge it
with empty base and leave "our" version in the index file, just
like we do for the case in conflicting merge.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
As promised, this is the "big tool rename" patch. The primary differences
since 0.99.6 are:
(1) git-*-script are no more. The commands installed do not
have any such suffix so users do not have to remember if
something is implemented as a shell script or not.
(2) Many command names with 'cache' in them are renamed with
'index' if that is what they mean.
There are backward compatibility symblic links so that you and
Porcelains can keep using the old names, but the backward
compatibility support is expected to be removed in the near
future.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
When we resolve a merge between two branches, and it removes a file in the
current branch, we notify the person doing the resolve with a big nice
notice like
Removing xyzzy
which is all well and good.
HOWEVER, we also do this when the file was actually removed in the current
branch, and we're merging with another branch that didn't have it removed
(or, indeed, if the other branch _did_ have it removed, but the common
parent was far enough back that the file still existed in there).
And that just doesn't make sense. In that case we're not removing
anything: the file didn't exist in the branch we're merging into in the
first place. So the message just makes people nervous, and makes no sense.
This has been around forever, but I never bothered to do anything about
it.
Until now.
The trivial fix is to only talk about removing files if the file existed
in the branch we're merging into, but will not exist in the result.
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Simple whitespace-related tidyups ensuring style consistency.
This is carried over from my old git-pb branch.
Signed-off-by: Petr Baudis <pasky@ucw.cz>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
When a merge adds a file DF and removes a directory there by
deleting a path DF/DF, git-merge-one-file-script can be called
for the removal of DF/DF when the path DF is already created by
"git-read-tree -m -u". When this happens, we get confused by a
failure return from 'rm -f -- "$4"' (where $4 is DF/DF); finding
file DF there the "rm -f" command complains that DF is not a
directory.
What we want to ensure is that there is no file DF/DF in this
case. Avoid getting ourselves confused by first checking if
there is a file, and only then try to remove it (and check for
failure from the "rm" command).
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
This uses git-checkout-file to make sure that the full pathname is
created, instead of the script having to verify it by hand. Also,
simplify the 3-way merge case by just writing to the right file and
setting the initial index contents early.
Junio points out that we may need to create the path leading
up the the file we merge.
And we need to be more careful with the "exec"s we've done
to exit on success - only do the on the last command in the
pipeline, not the first one ;)
Chain the resolving sequences (e.g. git-cat-file - chmod -
git-update-cache) through &&s so we stop right away in case one of the
command fails, and report the error code to the script caller.
Also add a copyright notice, some blank lines, ;; on a separate line,
and nicer error messages.
Signed-off-by: Petr Baudis <pasky@ucw.cz>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
In the automerge case, permissions were not restored properly after the
merge tool was invoked and overwrote the target file.
Signed-off-by: Petr Baudis <pasky@ucw.cz>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
This changes how we handle merges: if a automated merge
fails, we will leave the index as a clean entry pointing
to the original branch, and leave the actual file _dirty_
the way the "merge" program left it.
You can then just do "git-diff-files -p" to see what the
merge conflicts did, fix them up, and commit the end result.
NOTE NOTE NOTE! Do _not_ use "git commit" to commit such
a merge. It won't set the parents right. I'll need to fix
that. In the meantime, you'd need to merge using
git-commit-tree $(git-write) -p HEAD -p MERGE_HEAD
or something like that by hand.
Thomas Glanzmann says that shell he uses on Solaris cannot grok
$(command) but the script does not use nested $(command) and
works happily just by using backticks instead.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
With this change, git-merge-one-file-script ceases to smudge
files in the work tree when recording the trivial merge results
(conflicting auto-merge failure case does not touch the work
tree file as before).
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
The merge-cache program was updated to pass executable bits when
calling git-merge-one-file-script, but the called script
supplied as an example were not using them carefully.
This patch fixes the following problems in the script:
* When a new file is created in a directory, which is a file in
the work tree, it tried to create leading directory but did
not check for failure from the "mkdir -p" command.
* The script did not check the exit status from the
git-update-cache command at all.
* The parameter "$4" to the script is a file name that can
contain almost any characters, so it must be quoted with
double quotes and also needs to be preceded with -- to mark
it as a non-option when passed to certain commands.
* The chmod command was used with parameter "$6" or "$7" to set
the mode bits. This contradicts with the strategy taken by
checkout-cache, where we honor user's umask and force only
the executable bits. With this patch, it creates a new file
by redirecting into it (thus honoring user's default umask),
and then uses "chmod +x" if we want the resulting file
executable. Without this fix, the merge result becomes 0644
or 0755 for users whose umask is 002 for whom it should
become 0664 or 0775.
* When "$1 -> $2 -> $3" case was not handled, the script did
not say which path it was working on, which was not so useful
when used with the -a option of git-merge-cache.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Linus said:
"Let's see what else I forgot.."
Not that many, but here they are.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
1) permissions aren't respected in the merge script (primarily because
they're never passed in to it in the first place). Fix that and also
check for permission conflicts in the merge
2) the delete of a file in both branches may indeed be just that, but it
could also be the indicator of a rename conflict (file moved to
different locations in both branches), so error out and ask the
committer for guidance.
Signed-off-by: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@SteelEye.com>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Doing the latest SCSI merge exposed two bugs in your merge script:
1) It doesn't like a completely new directory (the misc tree contains a
new drivers/scsi/lpfc)
2) the merge testing logic is wrong. You only want to exit 1 if the
merge fails.
They sure as hell aren't perfect, but they allow you to do:
./git-pull-script {other-git-directory}
to do the initial merge, and if that had content clashes, you do
merge-cache ./git-merge-one-file-script -a
which tries to auto-merge. When/if the auto-merge fails, it will
leave the last file in your working directory, and you can edit
it and then when you're happy you can do "update-cache filename"
on it. Re-do the merge-cache thing until there are no files left
to be merged, and now you can write the tree and commit:
write-tree
commit-tree .... -p $(cat .git/HEAD) -p $(cat .git/MERGE_HEAD)
and you're done.
Junio C Hamano