Re: Bogus error: Untracked working tree file '....' would be overwritten by merge. Aborting
- From
Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com>
- Date
- Nov 16, 2010, 11:24 UTC
- Message-ID
- <20101116112406.GA18259@do>
- In-Reply-To
- <AANLkTinv7XsXNR2MMbaGAUo2=WgL6SEWkuzwGU_7YVn0@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 11:26:19AM +0100, demerphq wrote:
Show 13 quoted lines
> The error in the subject line is generated if one has a git repo > checked out to a commit that adds a new file and one does something > like: > > git reset HEAD^ > > and then a merge operation that involves going forward onto or past HEAD. > > Why is this error generated when the file is *exactly* the same as the > file that would overwrite it? > > Obviously it makes sense to throw this error when data would be lost, > but when they are identical what is the point?
Something like this may help. Completely untested but could be a starting point. See [1] for a more generic case, where users just want git it ignore updating worktree and go ahead.
--
Duy
[1] http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/160568/focus=160725
-- 8< --
diff --git a/unpack-trees.c b/unpack-trees.c
index 803445a..f9451fc 100644
--- a/unpack-trees.c
+++ b/unpack-trees.c
@@ -980,6 +980,12 @@ static int same(struct cache_entry *a, struct cache_entry *b)
}
+static int identical_content(struct cache_entry *ce, struct stat *st)
+{
+ unsigned char sha1[20];
+ return !index_path(sha1, ce->name, st, 0) && !hashcmp(sha1, ce->sha1);
+}
+
/*
* When a CE gets turned into an unmerged entry, we
* want it to be up-to-date
@@ -1006,6 +1012,10 @@ static int verify_uptodate_1(struct cache_entry *ce,
*/
if (S_ISGITLINK(ce->ce_mode))
return 0;
+
+ if (identical_content(ce, &st))
+ return 0;
+
errno = 0;
}
if (errno == ENOENT)
@@ -1195,6 +1205,8 @@ static int verify_absent_1(struct cache_entry *ce,
return 0;
}
+ if (identical_content(ce, &st))
+ return 0;
return o->gently ? -1 :
add_rejected_path(o, error_type, ce->name);
}
-- 8< --