mailing list mirror (one of many)
 help / color / mirror / code / Atom feed
From: Emily Shaffer <>
Subject: BUG() during criss-cross merge with directory rename and deleted file
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2019 15:09:28 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <> (raw)

Hi all,

As mentioned during the standup in #git-devel today, we encountered a
BUG() during certain circumstances of a criss-cross merge. Timing has
prevented me from getting the repro case together to send just yet, but
it appears that the issue is as follows:

 - During a merge in a repo with fairly complicated, merge-y history,
   the following BUG() is seen:
   "BUG: There are unmerged index entries:
    BUG: 2 baz/bar.txt
    BUG: merge-recursive.c:429: unmerged index entries in
 - But when the user then runs `git status` (after clearing
   .git/index.lock) the directory is clean.
 - The repo does not contain a 'baz/bar.txt' (although 'baz/' exists).
 - In the repo's history a 'foo/bar.txt' can be found (that is the only
   'bar.txt' to ever exist in the project).

Digging further shows:

 - The merge had  multiple closest shared ancestors (criss-cross
 - Directory 'foo/' was renamed on one side to 'baz/'...
 - ...and 'foo/bar.txt' was deleted on the other side.
 - When the virtual ancestor is generated, the directory rename can't be
   resolved and leaves a conflict.
 - The virtual ancestor being written to disk is in a conflicted state.
 - This causes the top-level merge to fail, printing the BUG() above
   which references a 'baz/bar.txt' that never really lived there.


 - If merge.directoryrenames is set to any value besides "conflict", the
   merge succeeds (no BUG() generated).

This seems to have been introduced in 8c8e5bd6eb331d055aa7fa6345f6dcdadd658979
although I haven't bisected it yet.

It seems like the solution is to watch for whether we're making a
virtual ancestor during a recursive merge, and if so, to treat
merge.directoryrenames = "conflict" as "true" or "false" instead.

I plan to modify the tests added in 8c8e5bd6 to highlight this issue
(just haven't had time, and probably won't til next week), and send a
patch doing the special treatment on merge.directoryrenames.

Happy to hear other ideas folks have.

 - Emily

             reply	other threads:[~2019-07-26 22:09 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-07-26 22:09 Emily Shaffer [this message]
2019-08-05 22:33 ` [PATCH 1/1] merge-recursive: avoid directory rename detection in recursive case Elijah Newren
2019-08-06 16:57   ` Junio C Hamano
2019-08-06 17:26     ` Elijah Newren
2019-08-06 17:49     ` Junio C Hamano
2019-08-06 17:26   ` Junio C Hamano
2019-08-06 17:29     ` Elijah Newren
2019-08-06 20:28   ` Emily Shaffer
2019-08-06 21:16     ` Elijah Newren
2019-08-06 21:54       ` Emily Shaffer
2019-08-08 11:00       ` Jeff King

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:

  List information:

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \ \ \ \ \ \

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).