kernel/git - git - PowerEL Git System

Commit Graph

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
Brian Gernhardt	9f6cea97c9	t6022: Use -eq not = to test output of wc -l When comparing numbers such as "3" to "$(wc -l)", we should check for numerical equality using -eq instead of string equality using = because some implementations of wc output extra whitespace. Signed-off-by: Brian Gernhardt <brian@gernhardtsoftware.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>	15 years ago
Jonathan Nieder	cae3aa79aa	t6022 (renaming merge): chain test commands with && Using 'return' in an attempt to end a test assertion can have unpredictable results (probably escaping from test_run_ and breaking its bookkeeping). Redo the control flow using helpers like test_expect_code and git diff --exit-code, so each test assertion can follow the usual form command that should succeed && command that should succeed && command that should succeed && ... Signed-off-by: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>	15 years ago
Elijah Newren	4ab9a157d0	merge_content(): Check whether D/F conflicts are still present If all the paths below some directory involved in a D/F conflict were not removed during the rest of the merge, then the contents of the file whose path conflicted needs to be recorded in file with an alternative filename. Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>	15 years ago
Elijah Newren	2adc7dcc11	conflict_rename_rename_1to2(): Fix checks for presence of D/F conflicts This function is called from process_df_entry(), near the end of the merge. Rather than just checking whether one of the sides of the merge had a directory at the same path as one of our files, check whether that directory is still present by this point of our merge. Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>	15 years ago
Elijah Newren	a0de2f6bd3	conflict_rename_delete(): Check whether D/F conflicts are still present If all the paths below some directory involved in a D/F conflict were not removed during the rest of the merge, then the contents of the file whose path conflicted needs to be recorded in file with an alternative filename. Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>	15 years ago
Elijah Newren	882fd11aff	merge-recursive: Delay content merging for renames Move the handling of content merging for renames from process_renames() to process_df_entry(). Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>	15 years ago
Elijah Newren	07413c5a31	merge-recursive: Move handling of double rename of one file to two Move the handling of rename/rename conflicts where one file is renamed to two different files, from process_renames() to process_df_entry(). Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>	15 years ago
Elijah Newren	707983484b	t6022: Add tests for rename/rename combined with D/F conflicts Add tests where one file is renamed to two different paths in different sides of history, and where each of the new files matches the name of a directory from the opposite side of history. Include tests for both the case where the merge results in those directories not being cleanly removed, and where those directories are cleanly removed during the merge. Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>	15 years ago
Elijah Newren	52304ecddf	t6022: Add paired rename+D/F conflict: (two/file, one/file) -> (one, two) An interesting testcase is having two files each in their own subdirectory getting renamed to the toplevel at the directory pathname of the other. Questions arise as to whether the order of operations matters and whether the directories can correctly get out of the way and make room for the new files. Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>	15 years ago
Elijah Newren	588504b694	t6022: Add tests with both rename source & dest involved in D/F conflicts Having the source of a rename be involved in a directory/file conflict does not currently pose any difficulties to the current merge-recursive algorithm (in contrast to destinations of renames and D/F conflicts). However, combining the two seemed like good testcases to include for completeness. Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>	15 years ago
Elijah Newren	3398f2f583	t6022: Add tests for reversing order of merges when D/F conflicts present When merging two branches with some path involved in a D/F conflict, the choice of which branch to merge into the other matters for (at least) two reasons: (1) whether the working copy has a directory full of files that is in the way of a file, or a file exists that is in the way of a directory of files, (2) when the directory full of files does not disappear due to the merge, what files at the same paths should be renamed to (e.g. filename~HEAD vs. filename~otherbranch). Add some tests that reverse the merge order of two other tests, and which verify the contents are as expected (namely, that the results are identical other than modified-for-uniqueness filenames involving branch names). Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>	15 years ago
Elijah Newren	af6e175199	t6022: Add test combinations of {content conflict?, D/F conflict remains?} Add testing of the various ways that a renamed file to a path involved in a directory/file conflict may be involved in. This includes whether or not there are conflicts of the contents of the renamed file (if the file was modified on both sides of history), and whether the directory from the other side of the merge will disappear as a result of the merge or not. Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>	15 years ago
Gary V. Vaughan	4fdf71be1c	tests: use "test_cmp", not "diff", when verifying the result In tests, call test_cmp rather than raw diff where possible (i.e. if the output does not go to a pipe), to allow the use of, say, 'cmp' when the default 'diff -u' is not compatible with a vendor diff. When that is not possible, use $DIFF, as set in GIT-BUILD-OPTIONS. Signed-off-by: Gary V. Vaughan <gary@thewrittenword.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>	15 years ago
Alex Riesen	8a35981927	Add a test for merging changed and rename-changed branches Also leave a warning for future merge-recursive explorers. Signed-off-by: Alex Riesen <raa.lkml@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>	18 years ago
Junio C Hamano	5b329a5f5e	t6022: ignoring untracked files by merge-recursive when they do not matter Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>	19 years ago
Junio C Hamano	36889a5078	tests: merge-recursive is usable without Python Many tests still protected themselves with $no_python; there is no need to do so anymore. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>	19 years ago
Junio C Hamano	fcc387db9b	read-tree -m -u: do not overwrite or remove untracked working tree files. When a merge results in a creation of a path that did not exist in HEAD, and if you already have that path on the working tree, because the index has not been told about the working tree file, read-tree happily removes it. The issue was brought up by Santi Béjar on the list. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>	19 years ago
Johannes Schindelin	abb7c7b31c	Optionally work without python In some setups (notably server setups) you do not need that dependency. Gracefully handle the absence of python when NO_PYTHON is defined. Signed-off-by: Johannes E. Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>	19 years ago
Junio C Hamano	724b511d4f	merge-recursive: conflicting rename case. This changes the way the case two branches rename the same path to different paths is handled. Earlier, the code removed the original path and added both destinations to the index at stage0. This commit changes it to leave the original path at stage1, and two destination paths at stage2 and stage3, respectively. [jc: I am not really sure if this makes much difference in the real life merge situations. What should happen when our branch renames A to B and M to N, while their branch renames A to M? That is, M remains in our tree as is.] Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>	20 years ago
Junio C Hamano	b825e6ff5d	t/t6022: a new test for renaming merge. This adds a couple of tests to cover the following renaming merge cases: - one side renames and the other side does not, with and without content conflicts. - both side rename to the same path, with and without content conflicts. The test setup also prepares a case in which both side rename to different destination, but currently the code collapses these destination paths and removes the original path, which may be wrong. The outcome of this case is not checked by the tests in this round. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>	20 years ago

21 Commits (9398cc4bd44a08a0f6a69b01b2051b94bd2f994d)