From: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2008 09:34:05 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH] modify/delete conflict resolution overwrites untracked file
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.1.00.0812151032230.14632@racer>
In-Reply-To: <7vmyeyyuuh.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org>

Hi,

On Sun, 14 Dec 2008, Junio C Hamano wrote:


> merge-recursive: do not clobber untracked working tree garbage
> 
> When merge-recursive wanted to create a new file in the work tree (either
> as the final result, or a hint for reference purposes while delete/modify
> conflicts), it unconditionally overwrote an untracked file in the working
> tree.  Be careful not to lose whatever the user has that is not tracked.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
> ---

Thanks, I had no time at all to look into this issue.

> diff --git c/merge-recursive.c w/merge-recursive.c
> index a0c804c..2da4333 100644
> --- c/merge-recursive.c
> +++ w/merge-recursive.c
> @@ -447,6 +447,30 @@ static void flush_buffer(int fd, const char *buf, unsigned long size)
>  	}
>  }
>  
> +static int would_lose_untracked(const char *path)
> +{
> +	int pos = cache_name_pos(path, strlen(path));
> +
> +	if (pos < 0)
> +		pos = -1 - pos;
> +	while (pos < active_nr &&
> +	       !strcmp(path, active_cache[pos]->name)) {
> +		/*
> +		 * If stage #0, it is definitely tracked.
> +		 * If it has stage #2 then it was tracked
> +		 * before this merge started.  All other
> +		 * cases the path was not tracked.
> +		 */
> +		switch (ce_stage(active_cache[pos])) {
> +		case 0:
> +		case 2:
> +			return 0;
> +		}
> +		pos++;
> +	}
> +	return file_exists(path);

I wonder if it is cheaper to test file_exists() when the index contains a 
lot of files...

Thanks,
Dscho