From: Pickens, James E <james.e.pickens@intel.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2009 16:57:36 GMT
Subject: RE: [PATCH 1/2] Demonstrate bugs when a directory is replaced with a symlink.
Message-ID: <3BA20DF9B35F384F8B7395B001EC3FB342402A13@azsmsx507.amr.corp.intel.com>
In-Reply-To: <7v4osvyjl2.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>

On Wed, Jul 29, 2009, Junio C Hamano<gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
> Michael J Gruber <git@drmicha.warpmail.net> writes:
>> Isn't the failure of the second test caused by that of the first one?
>> a/b-2/c/d is gone from the worktree, and master does not touch it, so
>> the merge leaves the worktree version (non-existent) as is.
>
> To avoid that impression the second test should probably have been written
> to start from a clean slate, using "reset --hard" or something.

I'll send a new patch shortly that combines the two tests into one and
includes the "reset --hard".

> Kjetil's patch actually fixes the first one, but the second one will still
> show breakage.
>
> I wonder if the breakage is in recursive merge or in the generic read-tree
> three-way merge code.  I highly suspect that using "git merge -s resolve"
> would make the test pass.  Historically recursive merge is known to be
> careless in many corner cases.

You're right, using the resolve strategy does make the test pass.

James