Re: [PATCH 3/3] merge-recursive: Avoid incorporating uncommitted changes in a merge

[Junio C Hamano]

Elijah Newren <new...@gmail.com> writes:

> diff --git a/merge-recursive.c b/merge-recursive.c
> index 2ecf495cc2..780f81a8bd 100644
> --- a/merge-recursive.c
> +++ b/merge-recursive.c
> @@ -1952,6 +1952,13 @@ int merge_trees(struct merge_options *o,
>       }
>  
>       if (oid_eq(&common->object.oid, &merge->object.oid)) {
> +             struct strbuf sb = STRBUF_INIT;
> +
> +             if (index_has_changes(&sb)) {
> +                     err(o, _("Dirty index: cannot merge (dirty: %s)"),
> +                         sb.buf);
> +                     return 0;
> +             }
>               output(o, 0, _("Already up to date!"));
>               *result = head;
>               return 1;

I haven't come up with an addition to the test suite, but I suspect
this change is conceptually wrong.  What if a call to this function
is made during a recursive, inner merge?

Perhaps something like this is needed?

 merge-recursive.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/merge-recursive.c b/merge-recursive.c
index 780f81a8bd..0fc580d8ca 100644
--- a/merge-recursive.c
+++ b/merge-recursive.c
@@ -1954,7 +1954,7 @@ int merge_trees(struct merge_options *o,
        if (oid_eq(&common->object.oid, &merge->object.oid)) {
                struct strbuf sb = STRBUF_INIT;
 
-               if (index_has_changes(&sb)) {
+               if (!o->call_depth && index_has_changes(&sb)) {
                        err(o, _("Dirty index: cannot merge (dirty: %s)"),
                            sb.buf);
                        return 0;