#!/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 (rename/rename)" out && git ls-files -s >out && test_line_count = 8 out && git ls-files -u >out && test_line_count = 2 out && git ls-files -o >out && test_line_count = 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 (rename/rename)" out && git ls-files -s >out && test_line_count = 4 out && git ls-files -u >out && test_line_count = 2 out && git ls-files -o >out && test_line_count = 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: # 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: # # 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