Re: [PATCH] modify/delete conflict resolution overwrites untracked file
From: Johannes Schindelin <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 22:45:46
Hi, On Sun, 14 Dec 2008, Junio C Hamano wrote:
merge-recursive: do not clobber untracked working tree garbage When merge-recursive wanted to create a new file in the work tree (either as the final result, or a hint for reference purposes while delete/modify conflicts), it unconditionally overwrote an untracked file in the working tree. Be careful not to lose whatever the user has that is not tracked. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <redacted> ---
Thanks, I had no time at all to look into this issue.
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
diff --git c/merge-recursive.c w/merge-recursive.c index a0c804c..2da4333 100644 --- c/merge-recursive.c +++ w/merge-recursive.c@@ -447,6 +447,30 @@ static void flush_buffer(int fd, const char *buf, unsigned long size) } } +static int would_lose_untracked(const char *path) +{ + int pos = cache_name_pos(path, strlen(path)); + + if (pos < 0) + pos = -1 - pos; + while (pos < active_nr && + !strcmp(path, active_cache[pos]->name)) { + /* + * If stage #0, it is definitely tracked. + * If it has stage #2 then it was tracked + * before this merge started. All other + * cases the path was not tracked. + */ + switch (ce_stage(active_cache[pos])) { + case 0: + case 2: + return 0; + } + pos++; + } + return file_exists(path);
I wonder if it is cheaper to test file_exists() when the index contains a lot of files... Thanks, Dscho