Instead of always writing to disk use TemporaryBuffer.LocalFile to
store up to 10 MiB of merge result in RAM. Most source code will
fit into this limit, avoiding local disk IO for simple merges.
Larger files will automatically spool to a temporary file that
can be cleaned up in the finally, reducing the risk of leaving
them on disk and consuming space in /tmp.
Change-Id: Ieccbd9b354d4dd3d2bc1304857325ae7a9f34ec6
The only caller of writeMergedFile is updateIndex, and the only
user of this path object is the code within the method. This is
a no-op change that opens the door to refactoring the way temp
files are handled for inCore merges.
Change-Id: I863a303194689a806b667e55eb958e1decf046c1
When merging common ancestors to create a single virtual common
ancestor the commit does not need to be inserted into the Git
repository. Instead just mock it out in memory as part of the
merger's RevWalk pool.
Make the author and committer stable and predictable for any
given pair of merge bases. It is not necessary for the caller's
name or email to be used as the commit will not be written out.
Change-Id: I88d5ee4de121950e1b032a5c10486c9d2c42656c
Currently if the remote defined in repo manifest xml is non-relative (e.g.
"https://chromium.googlesource.com"), our code will break. This change fixed
that.
It also makes that remotes are ending with "/".
Change-Id: Icef46360b32227a9db1d9bb9e6d929c72aeaa8df
Signed-off-by: Yuxuan 'fishy' Wang <fishywang@google.com>
Instead of passing on the start point as is to CreateBranchCommand, the
resolved ObjectId was used. Given this, CreateBranchCommand did not set
up tracking.
This also fixes CreateBranchCommand with setStartPoint(null) to use HEAD
(instead of NPEing), as documented in the Javadoc.
Bug: 441153
Change-Id: I5ed82b4a4b4a32a81a7fa2854636b921bcb3d471
Signed-off-by: Robin Stocker <robin@nibor.org>
Configure Maven surefire plugin to run tests concurrently using
multiple processes. By default use one process per core available
on the machine running the tests.
Running this on my MacBook Pro i7 with 8 cores 16 GB RAM SSD
I get the following results:
forkCount "mvn clean install" on org.eclipse.jgit.test
--------------------------------------------------------
1 02:36 min
2 01:26 min
4 00:56 min
6 00:49 min
8 00:49 min
10 00:51 min
When on-access scan of McAfee virus scanner is enabled the optimum
is at half the number of cores (4 of 8) on my MacBook.
Set system property "test-fork-count" to override the default.
Either set it to an absolute number e.g. "4" or in units of
cores available on the system running the build. E.g. "0.5C" to
use 4 cores on a 8 core system or "1C" to use all 8 cores on
a 8 core system.
E.g.
$ mvn clean install -Dtest-fork-count=0.5C
to use half the number of cores processes to run tests.
Change-Id: Ifdbd1ae8153f2033922eae6ae8942c36db1f9806
Signed-off-by: Sohn <matthias.sohn@sap.com>
Previously an equality check was performed so an exception would
be thrown if any other options were set.
Change-Id: I36b60e2c0a8aef9fcfe663055dba520192996872
With these, more code can use BranchConfig instead of directly accessing
the raw configuration values.
Change-Id: I4b52f97ff0e3fc8f097512806f043c615a3d2594
Signed-off-by: Matthias Sohn <matthias.sohn@sap.com>
JGit handled this case improperly which these tests demonstrate. Fixed
by I25915880f304090fe90584c79bddf021231227a2.
Bug: 440537
Change-Id: Ia29c1d6cf8c0ce724cc3ff5ed9e0b396949b44bf
Signed-off-by: Laurent Goubet <laurent.goubet@obeo.fr>
Signed-off-by: Matthias Sohn <matthias.sohn@sap.com>
If the IndexDiffFilter is asked whether it should include or filter out
a certain path and for that path there is a dircache entry with a stage
different from 0, then the filter should never filter out this entry.
IndexDiffFilter is an optimized version of AnyDiffFilter and there is no
case where the index contains non-0 stages but we still don't see any
diff for that path.
Change-Id: I25915880f304090fe90584c79bddf021231227a2
Signed-off-by: Matthias Sohn <matthias.sohn@sap.com>
In change If45bc3d078b3d3de87b758e71d7379059d709603 a new parameter was
added to 3 protected methods of ResolveMerger. This breaks the code of
developers which have subclassed ResolveMerger. The API baseline check
in Eclipse reports this as API breakage.
Since this will break only providers but not consumers of the API this
should be allowed also in minor versions. According to OSGi semantic
versioning
http://www.osgi.org/wiki/uploads/Links/SemanticVersioning.pdf
breaking providers in a minor version update is ok.
Therefore silence these errors using API filter rules.
Bug: 440757
Change-Id: Icabbd0e1de7e877c66a5c4a2c8391473f992a1aa
Signed-off-by: Matthias Sohn <matthias.sohn@sap.com>
It's an internal package which isn't part of the API. Mark it x-internal
to silence @since tag warnings which are only raised for new API.
Bug: 440757
Change-Id: Id05deaca43f135cd1bfe83cf1f29787cbbdbecac
Signed-off-by: Matthias Sohn <matthias.sohn@sap.com>
The fix is to move the new head commit to the newly-created revert
commit, so that additional revert commits will use the correct head.
Change-Id: I5de3a9a2a4c276e60af732e9c507cbbdfd1a4652
Signed-off-by: Maik Schreiber <blizzy@blizzy.de>
Signed-off-by: Matthias Sohn <matthias.sohn@sap.com>
Apparently repo allows projects overlapping, e.g. one project's path is "foo"
and another project's path is "foo/bar". This is not supported in git submodule.
At JGit repo side we'll skip all the submodules that are in subdirectories of
other submodules, and on repo side we'll make them submodules to resolve this
problem.
Change-Id: I6820c4ef400c530a36150b1228706adfcc43ef64
Signed-off-by: Yuxuan 'fishy' Wang <fishywang@google.com>
Previously when RecursiveMerger was trying to create a single virtual
common base for the merge it was failing when this lead to content-merge
conflicts. This is different from what native git is doing. When native
git's recursive merge algorithm creates a new common base it will merge
the multiple parents and simply take the merge result (potentially
including conflict markers) as common base. See my discussion with Shawn
here: http://www.spinics.net/lists/git/msg234959.html :
> - How should workingtree, index (stage1,2,3) look like if during
that
> merge of common ancestors a conflict occurs? Will I see in stage2
and
> stage3 really see content of X1 and X2?
Its done entirely in memory and never touches the working tree or
index. When a conflict exists in the X1-X2 merge the conflict is
preserved into the new virtual base.
There is still the possibility that the merge of parents lead to
conflicts. File/Folder conclicts, conflicts on filemodes. This commit
only fixes the situation for conflicts when merging content.
Bug: 438203
Change-Id: If45bc3d078b3d3de87b758e71d7379059d709603
During recursive merge jgit potentially has to merge multiple
common ancestors. If this fails because there are conflicts then
the exception thrown for that should have a message which states
this clearly. Previously a wrong message was given ("More than 200
merge bases ...")
Change-Id: Ia3c058d5575decdefd50390ed83b63668d31c1d1
Each time the longest common substring is found the diff algorithm
recurses to reprocess the regions before and after the common string.
Large files with many edits can trigger StackOverflowError as the
algorithm attempts to process a deeply split tree of regions. This
is especially prone to happen in servers where the Java stack size
may have been limited to 1M or even 256K.
To keep edits produced in order a queue is used to process edits
in a depth-first strategy.
Change-Id: Iae7260c6934efdffac7c7bee4d3633a8208924f7
When RecursiveMerger tried to determine a common base tree it was
recursively tried to merge multiple common bases. But these intermediate
merges which have just been done to determine a single common base for
the final merge already filled some important fields (toBeCheckedOut,
toBeDeleted, ...). These side effects of the intermediate merges led to
wrong results of the final merge. One symptom was that after a recursive
merge which should be succesful you could still see leftover files in
the worktree: files which existed in the (virtual) common base but which
don't exist anymore in the branches to be merged.
The solution is easy: Clear the appropriate fields after common base
determination and start the final merge with a clean state.
Change-Id: I644ea9e1cb15360f7901bc0483cdb9286308c226
Signed-off-by: Robin Rosenberg <robin.rosenberg@dewire.com>
As described in native gits file "git-read-tree.txt" git has in a
special mode when doing the "initial" checkout. "Initial" means that the
index is empty before the checkout. This was not handled correctly in
JGit and is fixed in this commit. Also see
https://github.com/git/git/blob/master/Documentation/git-read-tree.txt#L181
Change-Id: I9b9d1bd9ebf349cfca420c891c7b099a18d07ba4
It contained outdated information about attaching patches to bug
reports. Shorten it to the essentials.
Also format it using markdown and rename it to CONTRIBUTING.md, which is
a convention and doesn't include "patches" in the name.
Change-Id: I9ee73f16e6fa8fbf529ac0ca791e2375d4d56d68
Signed-off-by: Robin Stocker <robin@nibor.org>
Setting branch.<name>.rebase or pull.rebase to 'preserve' will preserve
merges during rebase. Also, pull.rebase is now consulted if there is no
branch-specific configuration.
Bug: 429664
Change-Id: I345fa295c7e774e0d0a8e6aba30fbfc3552e0084
Signed-off-by: Konrad Kügler <swamblumat-eclipsebugs@yahoo.de>
With --preserve-merges C Git re-does merges using the rewritten merge
parents, discarding the old merge commit. For the common use-case of
pull with rebase this is unfortunate, as it loses the merge conflict
resolution (and other fixes in the merge), which may have taken quite
some time to get right in the first place.
To overcome this we use a two-fold approach:
If any of the (non-first) merge parents of a merge were rewritten, we
also redo the merge, to include the (potential) new changes in those
commits.
If only the first parent was rewritten, i.e. we are merging a branch
that is otherwise unaffected by the rebase, we instead cherry-pick the
merge commit at hand. This is done with the --mainline 1 and --no-commit
options to apply the changes introduced by the merge. Then we set up an
appropriate MERGE_HEAD and commit the result, thus effectively forging a
merge.
Apart from the approach taken to rebase merge commits, this
implementation closely follows C Git. As a result, both Git
implementations can continue rebases of each other.
Preserving merges works for both interactive and non-interactive rebase,
but as in C Git it is easy do get undesired outcomes with interactive
rebase.
CommitCommand supports committing merges during rebase now.
Bug: 439421
Change-Id: I4cf69b9d4ec6109d130ab8e3f42fcbdac25a13b2
Signed-off-by: Konrad Kügler <swamblumat-eclipsebugs@yahoo.de>
Allows to pass for example a List<RevCommit>.
Change-Id: I5522707060d7d3e0d848ba579956dc62f8fa0234
Signed-off-by: Konrad Kügler <swamblumat-eclipsebugs@yahoo.de>
DiffFormatter now suports either side being null and the log program
will output the diff for the first commit.
Bug: 395791
Change-Id: I378957b57e9ad1f7195ba416f402178453f0ebd3
Robin Rosenberg
Shawn Pearce
Matthias Sohn
Yuxuan 'fishy' Wang
Robin Stocker
Alexey Kuznetsov
Kevin Sawicki
Laurent Goubet
Christian Halstrick
Andrey Loskutov
Maik Schreiber
Shawn Pearce
Konrad Kügler