When editing patches e.g. in `git add -e`, it is quite common that a
hunk ends up having no -/+ lines, i.e. it is now supposed to do nothing.
This use case was broken by ad6e8ed37b (apply: reject a hunk that does
not do anything, 2015-06-01) with the good intention of catching a very
real, different issue in hand-edited patches.
So let's use the `--recount` option as the tell-tale whether the user
would actually be okay with no-op hunks.
Add a test case to make sure that this use case does not regress again.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Reviewed-by: Josh Steadmon <steadmon@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
A file can either be added, removed, copied, or renamed, but no two of
these actions can be done by the same patch. Some of these combinations
provoke error messages due to missing file names, and some are only
caught by an assertion. Check git patches already as they are parsed
and report conflicting lines on sight.
Found by Vegard Nossum using AFL.
Reported-by: Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@oracle.com>
Signed-off-by: Rene Scharfe <l.s.r@web.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
A hunk like this in a hand-edited patch without correctly adjusting
the line counts:
@@ -660,2 +660,2 @@ inline struct sk_buff *ieee80211_authentic...
auth = (struct ieee80211_authentication *)
skb_put(skb, sizeof(struct ieee80211_authentication));
- some old text
+ some new text
--
2.1.0
dev mailing list
at the end of the input does not have a good way for us to diagnose
it as a corrupt patch. We just read two context lines and discard
the remainder as cruft, which we must do in order to ignore the
e-mail footer. Notice that the patch does not change anything and
signal an error.
Note that this fix will not help if the hand-edited hunk header were
"@@ -660,3, +660,2" to include the removal. We would just remove
the old text without adding the new one, and treat "+ some new text"
and everything after that line as trailing cruft. So it is dubious
that this patch alone would help very much in practice, but it may
be better than nothing.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
When git apply is passed something that is not a patch, it does not produce
an error message or exit with a non-zero status if it was not actually
"applying" the patch i.e. --check or --numstat etc were supplied on the
command line.
Fix this by producing an error when apply fails to find any hunks whatsoever
while parsing the patch.
This will cause some of the output formats (--numstat, --diffstat, etc) to
produce an error when they formerly would have reported zero changes and
exited successfully. That seems like the correct behavior though. Failure
to recognize the input as a patch should be an error.
Plus, add a test.
Reported-by: Artem Bityutskiy <artem.bityutskiy@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Brandon Casey <drafnel@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Johannes Schindelin
René Scharfe
Junio C Hamano
Brandon Casey