1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/git/git.git synced 2024-05-18 03:06:17 +02:00
git/git-merge-one-file.sh

164 lines
3.4 KiB
Bash
Raw Normal View History

#!/bin/sh
#
# Copyright (c) Linus Torvalds, 2005
#
# This is the git per-file merge script, called with
#
# $1 - original file SHA1 (or empty)
# $2 - file in branch1 SHA1 (or empty)
# $3 - file in branch2 SHA1 (or empty)
# $4 - pathname in repository
# $5 - original file mode (or empty)
# $6 - file in branch1 mode (or empty)
# $7 - file in branch2 mode (or empty)
#
# Handle some trivial cases.. The _really_ trivial cases have
# been handled already by git read-tree, but that one doesn't
# do any merges that might change the tree layout.
USAGE='<orig blob> <our blob> <their blob> <path>'
USAGE="$USAGE <orig mode> <our mode> <their mode>"
LONG_USAGE="Usage: git merge-one-file $USAGE
Blob ids and modes should be empty for missing files."
2011-04-30 00:24:32 +02:00
SUBDIRECTORY_OK=Yes
. git-sh-setup
cd_to_toplevel
require_work_tree
if test $# != 7
then
echo "$LONG_USAGE"
exit 1
fi
case "${1:-.}${2:-.}${3:-.}" in
#
# Deleted in both or deleted in one and unchanged in the other
#
"$1.." | "$1.$1" | "$1$1.")
if test -n "$2"
then
echo "Removing $4"
else
# read-tree checked that index matches HEAD already,
# so we know we do not have this path tracked.
# there may be an unrelated working tree file here,
# which we should just leave unmolested. Make sure
# we do not have it in the index, though.
exec git update-index --remove -- "$4"
fi
if test -f "$4"
then
rm -f -- "$4" &&
rmdir -p "$(expr "z$4" : 'z\(.*\)/')" 2>/dev/null || :
fi &&
exec git update-index --remove -- "$4"
;;
#
# Added in one.
#
".$2.")
# the other side did not add and we added so there is nothing
# to be done, except making the path merged.
exec git update-index --add --cacheinfo "$6" "$2" "$4"
;;
"..$3")
echo "Adding $4"
if test -f "$4"
then
echo "ERROR: untracked $4 is overwritten by the merge." >&2
exit 1
fi
git update-index --add --cacheinfo "$7" "$3" "$4" &&
exec git checkout-index -u -f -- "$4"
;;
#
# Added in both, identically (check for same permissions).
#
".$3$2")
if test "$6" != "$7"
then
echo "ERROR: File $4 added identically in both branches," >&2
echo "ERROR: but permissions conflict $6->$7." >&2
exit 1
fi
echo "Adding $4"
git update-index --add --cacheinfo "$6" "$2" "$4" &&
exec git checkout-index -u -f -- "$4"
;;
#
# Modified in both, but differently.
#
"$1$2$3" | ".$2$3")
case ",$6,$7," in
*,120000,*)
echo "ERROR: $4: Not merging symbolic link changes." >&2
exit 1
;;
*,160000,*)
echo "ERROR: $4: Not merging conflicting submodule changes." >&2
exit 1
;;
esac
mergetools/p4merge: create a base if none available Originally, with no base, Git gave P4Merge $LOCAL as a dummy base: p4merge "$LOCAL" "$LOCAL" "$REMOTE" "$MERGED" Commit 0a0ec7bd changed this to: p4merge "empty file" "$LOCAL" "$REMOTE" "$MERGED" to avoid the problem of being unable to save in some circumstances with similar inputs. Unfortunately this approach produces much worse results on differing inputs. P4Merge really regards the blank file as the base, and once you have just a couple of differences between the two branches you end up with one a massive full-file conflict. The 3-way diff is not readable, and you have to invoke "difftool MERGE_HEAD HEAD" manually to get a useful view. The original approach appears to have invoked special 2-way merge behaviour in P4Merge that occurs only if the base filename is "" or equal to the left input. You get a good visual comparison, and it does not auto-resolve differences. (Normally if one branch matched the base, it would autoresolve to the other branch). But there appears to be no way of getting this 2-way behaviour and being able to reliably save. Having base==left appears to be triggering other assumptions. There are tricks the user can use to force the save icon on, but it's not intuitive. So we now follow a suggestion given in the original patch's discussion: generate a virtual base, consisting of the lines common to the two branches. This is the same as the technique used in resolve and octopus merges, so we relocate that code to a shared function. Note that if there are no differences at the same location, this technique can lead to automatic resolution without conflict, combining everything from the 2 files. As with the other merges using this technique, we assume the user will inspect the result before saving. Signed-off-by: Kevin Bracey <kevin@bracey.fi> Reviewed-by: David Aguilar <davvid@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2013-03-13 02:12:21 +01:00
src1=$(git-unpack-file $2)
src2=$(git-unpack-file $3)
case "$1" in
'')
echo "Added $4 in both, but differently."
mergetools/p4merge: create a base if none available Originally, with no base, Git gave P4Merge $LOCAL as a dummy base: p4merge "$LOCAL" "$LOCAL" "$REMOTE" "$MERGED" Commit 0a0ec7bd changed this to: p4merge "empty file" "$LOCAL" "$REMOTE" "$MERGED" to avoid the problem of being unable to save in some circumstances with similar inputs. Unfortunately this approach produces much worse results on differing inputs. P4Merge really regards the blank file as the base, and once you have just a couple of differences between the two branches you end up with one a massive full-file conflict. The 3-way diff is not readable, and you have to invoke "difftool MERGE_HEAD HEAD" manually to get a useful view. The original approach appears to have invoked special 2-way merge behaviour in P4Merge that occurs only if the base filename is "" or equal to the left input. You get a good visual comparison, and it does not auto-resolve differences. (Normally if one branch matched the base, it would autoresolve to the other branch). But there appears to be no way of getting this 2-way behaviour and being able to reliably save. Having base==left appears to be triggering other assumptions. There are tricks the user can use to force the save icon on, but it's not intuitive. So we now follow a suggestion given in the original patch's discussion: generate a virtual base, consisting of the lines common to the two branches. This is the same as the technique used in resolve and octopus merges, so we relocate that code to a shared function. Note that if there are no differences at the same location, this technique can lead to automatic resolution without conflict, combining everything from the 2 files. As with the other merges using this technique, we assume the user will inspect the result before saving. Signed-off-by: Kevin Bracey <kevin@bracey.fi> Reviewed-by: David Aguilar <davvid@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2013-03-13 02:12:21 +01:00
orig=$(git-unpack-file $2)
create_virtual_base "$orig" "$src2"
;;
*)
echo "Auto-merging $4"
mergetools/p4merge: create a base if none available Originally, with no base, Git gave P4Merge $LOCAL as a dummy base: p4merge "$LOCAL" "$LOCAL" "$REMOTE" "$MERGED" Commit 0a0ec7bd changed this to: p4merge "empty file" "$LOCAL" "$REMOTE" "$MERGED" to avoid the problem of being unable to save in some circumstances with similar inputs. Unfortunately this approach produces much worse results on differing inputs. P4Merge really regards the blank file as the base, and once you have just a couple of differences between the two branches you end up with one a massive full-file conflict. The 3-way diff is not readable, and you have to invoke "difftool MERGE_HEAD HEAD" manually to get a useful view. The original approach appears to have invoked special 2-way merge behaviour in P4Merge that occurs only if the base filename is "" or equal to the left input. You get a good visual comparison, and it does not auto-resolve differences. (Normally if one branch matched the base, it would autoresolve to the other branch). But there appears to be no way of getting this 2-way behaviour and being able to reliably save. Having base==left appears to be triggering other assumptions. There are tricks the user can use to force the save icon on, but it's not intuitive. So we now follow a suggestion given in the original patch's discussion: generate a virtual base, consisting of the lines common to the two branches. This is the same as the technique used in resolve and octopus merges, so we relocate that code to a shared function. Note that if there are no differences at the same location, this technique can lead to automatic resolution without conflict, combining everything from the 2 files. As with the other merges using this technique, we assume the user will inspect the result before saving. Signed-off-by: Kevin Bracey <kevin@bracey.fi> Reviewed-by: David Aguilar <davvid@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2013-03-13 02:12:21 +01:00
orig=$(git-unpack-file $1)
;;
esac
git merge-file "$src1" "$orig" "$src2"
ret=$?
msg=
if test $ret != 0
then
msg='content conflict'
fi
# Create the working tree file, using "our tree" version from the
# index, and then store the result of the merge.
2011-04-30 00:24:32 +02:00
git checkout-index -f --stage=2 -- "$4" && cat "$src1" >"$4" || exit 1
rm -f -- "$orig" "$src1" "$src2"
if test "$6" != "$7"
then
if test -n "$msg"
then
msg="$msg, "
fi
msg="${msg}permissions conflict: $5->$6,$7"
ret=1
fi
if test -z "$1"
then
ret=1
fi
if test $ret != 0
then
echo "ERROR: $msg in $4" >&2
exit 1
fi
exec git update-index -- "$4"
;;
*)
echo "ERROR: $4: Not handling case $1 -> $2 -> $3" >&2
;;
esac
exit 1