summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorDerrick Stolee <dstolee@microsoft.com>2021-07-29 14:52:03 (GMT)
committerJunio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>2021-07-29 19:36:34 (GMT)
commit83ad8ca596dd879d2907a240fb24a1603bb1decc (patch)
treebaeaf74df81718d44bb399ac2971a8fad3377688
parente05cdb17e89a2d3257533d47350b3138bfce8737 (diff)
downloadgit-83ad8ca596dd879d2907a240fb24a1603bb1decc.zip
git-83ad8ca596dd879d2907a240fb24a1603bb1decc.tar.gz
git-83ad8ca596dd879d2907a240fb24a1603bb1decc.tar.bz2
t1092: test merge conflicts outside cone
Conflicts can occur outside of the sparse-checkout definition, and in that case users might try to resolve the conflicts in several ways. Document a few of these ways in a test. Make it clear that this behavior is not necessarily the optimal flow, since users can become confused when Git deletes these files from the worktree in later commands. Reviewed-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Derrick Stolee <dstolee@microsoft.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
-rwxr-xr-xt/t1092-sparse-checkout-compatibility.sh43
1 files changed, 43 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/t/t1092-sparse-checkout-compatibility.sh b/t/t1092-sparse-checkout-compatibility.sh
index 91e30d6..4c3bcb3 100755
--- a/t/t1092-sparse-checkout-compatibility.sh
+++ b/t/t1092-sparse-checkout-compatibility.sh
@@ -114,6 +114,16 @@ test_expect_success 'setup' '
git add . &&
git commit -m "file to dir" &&
+ for side in left right
+ do
+ git checkout -b merge-$side base &&
+ echo $side >>deep/deeper2/a &&
+ echo $side >>folder1/a &&
+ echo $side >>folder2/a &&
+ git add . &&
+ git commit -m "$side" || return 1
+ done &&
+
git checkout -b deepest base &&
echo "updated deepest" >deep/deeper1/deepest/a &&
git commit -a -m "update deepest" &&
@@ -482,6 +492,39 @@ test_expect_success 'merge' '
test_all_match git rev-parse HEAD^{tree}
'
+# NEEDSWORK: This test is documenting current behavior, but that
+# behavior can be confusing to users so there is desire to change it.
+# Right now, users might be using this flow to work through conflicts,
+# so any solution should present advice to users who try this sequence
+# of commands to follow whatever new method we create.
+test_expect_success 'merge with conflict outside cone' '
+ init_repos &&
+
+ test_all_match git checkout -b merge-tip merge-left &&
+ test_all_match git status --porcelain=v2 &&
+ test_all_match test_must_fail git merge -m merge merge-right &&
+ test_all_match git status --porcelain=v2 &&
+
+ # Resolve the conflict in different ways:
+ # 1. Revert to the base
+ test_all_match git checkout base -- deep/deeper2/a &&
+ test_all_match git status --porcelain=v2 &&
+
+ # 2. Add the file with conflict markers
+ test_all_match git add folder1/a &&
+ test_all_match git status --porcelain=v2 &&
+
+ # 3. Rename the file to another sparse filename and
+ # accept conflict markers as resolved content.
+ run_on_all mv folder2/a folder2/z &&
+ test_all_match git add folder2 &&
+ test_all_match git status --porcelain=v2 &&
+
+ test_all_match git merge --continue &&
+ test_all_match git status --porcelain=v2 &&
+ test_all_match git rev-parse HEAD^{tree}
+'
+
test_expect_success 'merge with outside renames' '
init_repos &&