From 57391a96fb3dea31d0f89861b66d59b063e9eb7a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: "Raymond E. Pasco" Date: Mon, 7 Jul 2025 08:12:30 -0400 Subject: [PATCH 1/4] apply: read in the index in --intent-to-add mode There are three main modes of operation for apply: applying only to the worktree, applying to the worktree and index (--index), and applying only to the index (--cached). The --intent-to-add flag modifies the first of these modes, applying only to the worktree, in a way which touches the index, because intents to add are special index entries. However, since its introduction in cff5dc09ed (apply: add --intent-to-add, 2018-05-26), it has not worked correctly in any but the most trivial (empty repository) cases, because the index is never read in (in apply, this is done in read_apply_cache()) before writing to it. This causes the operation to clobber the old, correct index with a new empty-tree index before writing intent-to-add entries to this empty index; the final result is that the index now records every existing file in the repository as deleted, which is incorrect. This error can be corrected by first reading the index. The update_index flag is correctly set if ita_only is true, because this flag causes the index to be updated. However, if we merely gate the call to read_apply_cache() behind update_index, then it will not be read when state->apply is false, even if it must be checked due to being in --index or --cached mode. Therefore, we instead read the index if it will be either checked or updated, because reading the index is a prerequisite to either. Reported-by: Ryan Hodges Original-patch-by: Johannes Altmanninger Signed-off-by: Raymond E. Pasco Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano --- apply.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/apply.c b/apply.c index 8bbe6ed224..c8d4517c0a 100644 --- a/apply.c +++ b/apply.c @@ -4833,7 +4833,7 @@ static int apply_patch(struct apply_state *state, LOCK_DIE_ON_ERROR); } - if (state->check_index && read_apply_cache(state) < 0) { + if ((state->check_index || state->update_index) && read_apply_cache(state) < 0) { error(_("unable to read index file")); res = -128; goto end; From 7c6e61f877fc8eee250f1fa3537434c0ff62ac1f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: "Raymond E. Pasco" Date: Mon, 7 Jul 2025 08:12:31 -0400 Subject: [PATCH 2/4] apply: only write intents to add for new files In the "apply only to files" mode (i.e., neither --index nor --cached mode), the index should not be touched except to record intents to add when --intent-to-add is on. Because having --intent-to-add on sets update_index, to indicate that we may touch the index, we can't rely only on that flag in create_file() (which is called to write both new files and updated files) to decide whether to write an index entry; if we did, we would write an index entry for every file being patched (which would moreover be an intent-to-add entry despite not being a new file, because we are going to turn on the CE_INTENT_TO_ADD flag in add_index_entry() if we enter it here and ita_only is true). To decide whether to touch the index, we need to check the specific reason the index would be updated, rather than merely their aggregate in the update_index flag. Because we have already entered write_out_results() and are performing writes, we know that state->apply is true. If state->check_index is additionally true, we are in --index or --cached mode, which updates the index and should always write, whereas if we are merely in ita_only mode we must only write if the patch is a new file creation patch. Signed-off-by: Raymond E. Pasco Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano --- apply.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/apply.c b/apply.c index c8d4517c0a..8637ad4c9f 100644 --- a/apply.c +++ b/apply.c @@ -4565,7 +4565,7 @@ static int create_file(struct apply_state *state, struct patch *patch) if (patch->conflicted_threeway) return add_conflicted_stages_file(state, patch); - else if (state->update_index) + else if (state->check_index || (state->ita_only && patch->is_new > 0)) return add_index_file(state, path, mode, buf, size); return 0; } From a4c969aa0d9c98ed29ea495fa0bae61bfbc713fe Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: "Raymond E. Pasco" Date: Mon, 7 Jul 2025 08:12:32 -0400 Subject: [PATCH 3/4] t4140: test apply --intent-to-add interactions Test that applying a new file creation patch with --intent-to-add to an existing index does not modify the index outside adding the correct intents-to-add, and that applying a patch with both modifications and new file creations with --intent-to-add correctly only adds intents-to-add to the index. Signed-off-by: Raymond E. Pasco Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano --- t/t4140-apply-ita.sh | 31 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 30 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/t/t4140-apply-ita.sh b/t/t4140-apply-ita.sh index c614eaf04c..0b11a8aef4 100755 --- a/t/t4140-apply-ita.sh +++ b/t/t4140-apply-ita.sh @@ -7,6 +7,10 @@ test_description='git apply of i-t-a file' test_expect_success setup ' test_write_lines 1 2 3 4 5 >blueprint && + cat blueprint >committed-file && + git add committed-file && + git commit -m "commit" && + cat blueprint >test-file && git add -N test-file && git diff >creation-patch && @@ -14,7 +18,14 @@ test_expect_success setup ' rm -f test-file && git diff >deletion-patch && - grep "deleted file mode 100644" deletion-patch + grep "deleted file mode 100644" deletion-patch && + + git rm -f test-file && + test_write_lines 6 >>committed-file && + cat blueprint >test-file && + git add -N test-file && + git diff >complex-patch && + git restore committed-file ' test_expect_success 'apply creation patch to ita path (--cached)' ' @@ -53,4 +64,22 @@ test_expect_success 'apply deletion patch to ita path (--index)' ' git ls-files --stage --error-unmatch test-file ' +test_expect_success 'apply creation patch to existing index with -N' ' + git rm -f test-file && + cat blueprint >index-file && + git add index-file && + git apply -N creation-patch && + + git ls-files --stage --error-unmatch index-file && + git ls-files --stage --error-unmatch test-file +' + +test_expect_success 'apply complex patch with -N' ' + git rm -f test-file index-file && + git apply -N complex-patch && + + git ls-files --stage --error-unmatch test-file && + git diff | grep "a/committed-file" +' + test_done From 2b49d97fcb8fb2f39ded5b00f0f1a8824267c89e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: "Raymond E. Pasco" Date: Mon, 7 Jul 2025 08:12:33 -0400 Subject: [PATCH 4/4] apply docs: clarify wording for --intent-to-add Avoid using a double negative, and keep in mind that --index and --cached are distinct modes of operation. Signed-off-by: Raymond E. Pasco Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano --- Documentation/git-apply.adoc | 9 +++++---- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/Documentation/git-apply.adoc b/Documentation/git-apply.adoc index 952518b8af..6c71ee69da 100644 --- a/Documentation/git-apply.adoc +++ b/Documentation/git-apply.adoc @@ -75,13 +75,14 @@ OPTIONS tree. If `--check` is in effect, merely check that it would apply cleanly to the index entry. +-N:: --intent-to-add:: When applying the patch only to the working tree, mark new files to be added to the index later (see `--intent-to-add` - option in linkgit:git-add[1]). This option is ignored unless - running in a Git repository and `--index` is not specified. - Note that `--index` could be implied by other options such - as `--cached` or `--3way`. + option in linkgit:git-add[1]). This option is ignored if + `--index` or `--cached` are used, and has no effect outside a Git + repository. Note that `--index` could be implied by other options + such as `--3way`. -3:: --3way::