Thread (37 messages) 37 messages, 3 authors, 2025-08-06

Re: [PATCH 3/6] t6423: document two bugs with rename-to-self testcases

From: Patrick Steinhardt <hidden>
Date: 2025-08-01 08:31:00

On Tue, Jul 22, 2025 at 03:23:08PM +0000, Elijah Newren via GitGitGadget wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
diff --git a/t/t6423-merge-rename-directories.sh b/t/t6423-merge-rename-directories.sh
index f48ed6d03534..69de7a3b84af 100755
--- a/t/t6423-merge-rename-directories.sh
+++ b/t/t6423-merge-rename-directories.sh
@@ -5092,7 +5111,85 @@ test_expect_success '12n: Directory rename transitively makes rename back to sel
 		git checkout -q B^0 &&
 
 		test_must_fail git cherry-pick A^0 >out &&
-		grep "CONFLICT (file location).*should perhaps be moved" out
+		grep "CONFLICT (file location).*should perhaps be moved" out &&
Let's use `test_grep` while at it.

[snip]
+test_expect_failure '12n2: Directory rename transitively makes rename back to self' '
+	test_setup_12n2 &&
+	(
+		cd 12n2 &&
+
+		git checkout -q B^0 &&
+
+		# NOTE: Since merge.directoryRenames=true, there is no path
+		# conflict for world vs. tools/world; it should end up at
+		# world.  The fact that world was unmodified on side A, means
+		# there was no content conflict; we should just take the
+		# content from side B -- i.e. delete the file.  So merging
+		# could just delete world.
+		#
+		# However, rename-to-self-via-directory-rename is a bit more
+		# challenging.  Relax this test to allow world to be treated
+		# as a modify/delete conflict as well.
+
+		test_might_fail git -c merge.directoryRenames=true merge A^0 >out &&
+
+		# Should have 1 entry for hello, and either 0 or 2 for world
+		test_stdout_line_count = 1 git ls-files -s hello &&
+		test_stdout_line_count != 1 git ls-files -s world &&
+		if test_stdout_line_count != 0 git ls-files -s world
+		then
+			grep "CONFLICT (modify/delete).*world deleted in HEAD" out
Here, as well.
+		fi
 	)
 '
I found it to be a bit weird that we have this conditional here.
Shouldn't we expect one particular outcome? Even if multiple outcomes
would be techincally correct I think we should expect one particular
result, but we may add a comment to explain that different output would
be fine, too.

Patrick
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help