Commit Graph

11 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Johannes Schindelin
5902f5f460 t6[4-9]*: adjust the references to the default branch name "main"
This trick was performed via

	$ (cd t &&
	   sed -i -e 's/master/main/g' -e 's/MASTER/MAIN/g' \
		-e 's/Master/Main/g' -- t6[4-9]*.sh)

This allows us to define `GIT_TEST_DEFAULT_INITIAL_BRANCH_NAME=main`
for those tests.

Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2020-11-19 15:44:18 -08:00
Johannes Schindelin
1f53df54eb t64*: preemptively adjust alignment to prepare for master -> main
We are in the process of renaming the default branch name to `main`,
which is two characters shorter than `master`. Therefore, some lines
need to be adjusted in t6416, t6422 and t6427 that want to align text
involving the default branch name.

Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2020-11-19 15:44:18 -08:00
Johannes Schindelin
334afbc76f tests: mark tests relying on the current default for init.defaultBranch
In addition to the manual adjustment to let the `linux-gcc` CI job run
the test suite with `master` and then with `main`, this patch makes sure
that GIT_TEST_DEFAULT_INITIAL_BRANCH_NAME is set in all test scripts
that currently rely on the initial branch name being `master by default.

To determine which test scripts to mark up, the first step was to
force-set the default branch name to `master` in

- all test scripts that contain the keyword `master`,

- t4211, which expects `t/t4211/history.export` with a hard-coded ref to
  initialize the default branch,

- t5560 because it sources `t/t556x_common` which uses `master`,

- t8002 and t8012 because both source `t/annotate-tests.sh` which also
  uses `master`)

This trick was performed by this command:

	$ sed -i '/^ *\. \.\/\(test-lib\|lib-\(bash\|cvs\|git-svn\)\|gitweb-lib\)\.sh$/i\
	GIT_TEST_DEFAULT_INITIAL_BRANCH_NAME=master\
	export GIT_TEST_DEFAULT_INITIAL_BRANCH_NAME\
	' $(git grep -l master t/t[0-9]*.sh) \
	t/t4211*.sh t/t5560*.sh t/t8002*.sh t/t8012*.sh

After that, careful, manual inspection revealed that some of the test
scripts containing the needle `master` do not actually rely on a
specific default branch name: either they mention `master` only in a
comment, or they initialize that branch specificially, or they do not
actually refer to the current default branch. Therefore, the
aforementioned modification was undone in those test scripts thusly:

	$ git checkout HEAD -- \
		t/t0027-auto-crlf.sh t/t0060-path-utils.sh \
		t/t1011-read-tree-sparse-checkout.sh \
		t/t1305-config-include.sh t/t1309-early-config.sh \
		t/t1402-check-ref-format.sh t/t1450-fsck.sh \
		t/t2024-checkout-dwim.sh \
		t/t2106-update-index-assume-unchanged.sh \
		t/t3040-subprojects-basic.sh t/t3301-notes.sh \
		t/t3308-notes-merge.sh t/t3423-rebase-reword.sh \
		t/t3436-rebase-more-options.sh \
		t/t4015-diff-whitespace.sh t/t4257-am-interactive.sh \
		t/t5323-pack-redundant.sh t/t5401-update-hooks.sh \
		t/t5511-refspec.sh t/t5526-fetch-submodules.sh \
		t/t5529-push-errors.sh t/t5530-upload-pack-error.sh \
		t/t5548-push-porcelain.sh \
		t/t5552-skipping-fetch-negotiator.sh \
		t/t5572-pull-submodule.sh t/t5608-clone-2gb.sh \
		t/t5614-clone-submodules-shallow.sh \
		t/t7508-status.sh t/t7606-merge-custom.sh \
		t/t9302-fast-import-unpack-limit.sh

We excluded one set of test scripts in these commands, though: the range
of `git p4` tests. The reason? `git p4` stores the (foreign) remote
branch in the branch called `p4/master`, which is obviously not the
default branch. Manual analysis revealed that only five of these tests
actually require a specific default branch name to pass; They were
modified thusly:

	$ sed -i '/^ *\. \.\/lib-git-p4\.sh$/i\
	GIT_TEST_DEFAULT_INITIAL_BRANCH_NAME=master\
	export GIT_TEST_DEFAULT_INITIAL_BRANCH_NAME\
	' t/t980[0167]*.sh t/t9811*.sh

Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2020-11-19 15:44:17 -08:00
Elijah Newren
ef52778708 merge tests: expect improved directory/file conflict handling in ort
merge-recursive.c is built on the idea of running unpack_trees() and
then "doing minor touch-ups" to get the result.  Unfortunately,
unpack_trees() was run in an update-as-it-goes mode, leading
merge-recursive.c to follow suit and end up with an immediate evaluation
and fix-it-up-as-you-go design.  Some things like directory/file
conflicts are not well representable in the index data structure, and
required special extra code to handle.  But then when it was discovered
that rename/delete conflicts could also be involved in directory/file
conflicts, the special directory/file conflict handling code had to be
copied to the rename/delete codepath.  ...and then it had to be copied
for modify/delete, and for rename/rename(1to2) conflicts, ...and yet it
still missed some.  Further, when it was discovered that there were also
file/submodule conflicts and submodule/directory conflicts, we needed to
copy the special submodule handling code to all the special cases
throughout the codebase.

And then it was discovered that our handling of directory/file conflicts
was suboptimal because it would create untracked files to store the
contents of the conflicting file, which would not be cleaned up if
someone were to run a 'git merge --abort' or 'git rebase --abort'.  It
was also difficult or scary to try to add or remove the index entries
corresponding to these files given the directory/file conflict in the
index.  But changing merge-recursive.c to handle these correctly was a
royal pain because there were so many sites in the code with similar but
not identical code for handling directory/file/submodule conflicts that
would all need to be updated.

I have worked hard to push all directory/file/submodule conflict
handling in merge-ort through a single codepath, and avoid creating
untracked files for storing tracked content (it does record things at
alternate paths, but makes sure they have higher-order stages in the
index).

Since updating merge-recursive is too much work and we don't want to
destabilize it, instead update the testsuite to have different
expectations for relevant directory/file/submodule conflict tests.

Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2020-10-26 12:31:23 -07:00
Elijah Newren
f06481f127 t/: new helper for tests that pass with ort but fail with recursive
There are a number of tests that the "recursive" backend does not handle
correctly but which the redesign in "ort" will.  Add a new helper in
lib-merge.sh for selecting a different test expectation based on the
setting of GIT_TEST_MERGE_ALGORITHM, and use it in various testcases to
document which ones we expect to fail under recursive but pass under
ort.

Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2020-10-26 12:31:23 -07:00
Elijah Newren
e8eb99d4a6 t642[23]: be more flexible for add/add conflicts involving pair renames
Much like the last commit accepted 'add/add' and 'rename/add'
interchangably, we also want to do the same for 'add/add' and
'rename/rename'.  This also allows us to avoid the ambiguity in meaning
with 'rename/rename' (is it two separate files renamed to the same
location, or one file renamed on both sides but differently)?

Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2020-08-10 15:59:01 -07:00
Elijah Newren
2a7c16c980 t6422, t6426: be more flexible for add/add conflicts involving renames
merge-recursive treats an add/add conflict where one of the adds came
from a rename as a separate 'rename/add' type of conflict.  However, if
there is not content conflict after the content merge(s), then the file
is not considered to be conflicted.  That suggests the conflict type is
really just add/add.  Other merge engines might choose to print messages
to the console that just refer to these as add/add conflicts; accept
both types of output.

Note: it could help to notify users if the three-way content merge of
the rename had content conflicts, because when we then go to two-way
merge THAT with the conflicting add we can get nested conflict markers.
merge-recursive, unfortunately, doesn't do that, but other merge engines
could.

Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2020-08-10 15:59:01 -07:00
Elijah Newren
a1d8b01775 t6422: fix multiple errors with the mod6 test expectations
This test had multiple issues causing it to fail for the wrong
reason(s):

  * rename/rename(1to2) conflicts have always left the original source
    path present in the working directory and index (at stage 1).  Thus,
    the triple rename/rename(1to2) should result in 9 unstaged files,
    not 6.
  * It messed up the three-way content merge for checking the results of
    merging for one of the renames, accidentally turning it into a
    two-way merge.
  * It got the contents of the base files it was using to compare
    against wrong, due to an off-by-one error, and overwrite-redirection
    ('>') instead of append-redirection ('>>').
  * It used slightly too-long conflict markers
  * It didn't include filenames in the conflict marker hunks (granted,
    that was a shortcoming of the merge-recursive backend for rename/add
    and rename/rename(2to1) conflicts, but since it's
    test_expect_failure anyway we might as well make it expect our
    preferred behavior rather than some compromise that we can't yet
    reach anyway).

Fix these issues so that a merge backend which correctly handles these
kinds of nested conflicts will pass the test.

Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2020-08-10 15:59:01 -07:00
Elijah Newren
3df4e3bb09 t6416, t6422: fix incorrect untracked file count
Apparently I don't know how to count untracked files, and since the
tests in question were marked as test_expect_failure, no one ever
noticed it until now.  Correct the count, as these tests clearly create
three untracked files ('out', 'err', and 'file_count').

(I believe this problem arose because earlier incarnations counted lines
via a pipe to 'wc -l'.  Reviewers asked that it be replaced by writing
the output to a file and using test_line_count, but when the temporary
output was added to a separate file, the count of untracked files should
have increased.)

Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2020-08-10 15:59:00 -07:00
Elijah Newren
3b6eb15d2b t6422: fix bad check against missing file
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2020-08-10 15:59:00 -07:00
Elijah Newren
919df31955 Collect merge-related tests to t64xx
The tests for the merge machinery are spread over several places.
Collect them into t64xx for simplicity.  Some notes:

t60[234]*.sh:
  Merge tests started in t602*, overgrew bisect and remote tracking
  tests in t6030, t6040, and t6041, and nearly overtook replace tests
  in t6050.  This made picking out relevant tests that I wanted to run
  in a tighter loop slightly more annoying for years.

t303*.sh:
  These started out as tests for the 'merge-recursive' toplevel command,
  but did not restrict to that and had lots of overlap with the
  underlying merge machinery.
t7405, t7613:
  submodule-specific merge logic started out in submodule.c but was
  moved to merge-recursive.c in commit 18cfc08866 ("submodule.c: move
  submodule merging to merge-recursive.c", 2018-05-15).  Since these
  tests are about the logic found in the merge machinery, moving these
  tests to be with the merge tests makes sense.

t7607, t7609:
  Having tests spread all over the place makes it more likely that
  additional tests related to a certain piece of logic grow in all those
  other places.  Much like t303*.sh, these two tests were about the
  underlying merge machinery rather than outer levels.

Tests that were NOT moved:

t76[01]*.sh:
  Other than the four tests mentioned above, the remaining tests in
  t76[01]*.sh are related to non-recursive merge strategies, parameter
  parsing, and other stuff associated with the highlevel builtin/merge.c
  rather than the recursive merge machinery.

t3[45]*.sh:
  The rebase testcases in t34*.sh also test the merge logic pretty
  heavily; sometimes changes I make only trigger failures in the rebase
  tests.  The rebase tests are already nicely coupled together, though,
  and I didn't want to mess that up.  Similar comments apply for the
  cherry-pick tests in t35*.sh.

Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2020-08-10 15:59:00 -07:00