For a directory/submodule conflict, we want contents from both the
directory and the submodule to be present for the user to use to resolve
the conflict, but we do not want paths under the directory being written
into the submodule and we do not want the merge being confused by paths
under the submodule being in the way. Add testcases for these situations.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
In the case of a file/submodule conflict, although both cannot exist at
the same path, we expect both to be present somewhere for the user to be
able to resolve the conflict with. Add a testcase for this.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
builtin/merge.c says that when we are about to perform a merge:
...the index must be in sync with the head commit. The strategies are
responsible to ensure this.
merge-recursive has always relied on unpack_trees() to enforce this
requirement, except in the case of an "Already up to date!" merge.
unpack-trees.c does not actually enforce this requirement, though. It
allows for a pair of exceptions, in cases which it refers to as #14(ALT)
and #2ALT. Documentation/technical/trivial-merge.txt can be consulted for
the precise meanings of the various case numbers and their meanings for
unpack-trees.c, but we have a high-level description of the intent behind
these two exceptions in a combined and summarized form in
Documentation/git-merge.txt:
...[merge will] abort if there are any changes registered in the index
relative to the `HEAD` commit. (One exception is when the changed index
entries are in the state that would result from the merge already.)
While this high-level description does describe conditions under which it
would be safe to allow the index to diverge from HEAD, it does not match
what is actually implemented. In particular, unpack-trees.c has no
knowledge of renames, and these two exceptions were written assuming that
no renames take place. Once renames get into the mix, it is no longer
safe to allow the index to not match for #2ALT. We could modify
unpack-trees to only allow #14(ALT) as an exception, but that would be
more strict than required for the resolve strategy (since the resolve
strategy doesn't handle renames at all). Therefore, unpack_trees.c seems
like the wrong place to fix this.
Further, if someone fixes the combination of break and rename detection
and modifies merge-recursive to take advantage of the combination, then it
will also no longer be safe to allow the index to not match for #14(ALT)
when the recursive strategy is in use. Therefore, leaving one of the
exceptions in place with the recursive merge strategy feels like we are
just leaving a latent bug in the code for folks in the future to stumble
across.
It may be possible to fix both unpack-trees and merge-recursive in a way
that implements the exception as stated in Documentation/git-merge.txt,
but it would be somewhat complex, possibly also buggy at first, and
ultimately, not all that valuable. Instead, just enforce the requirement
stated in builtin/merge.c; error out if the index does not match the HEAD
commit, just like the 'ours' and 'octopus' strategies do.
Some testcase fixups were in order:
t7611: had many tests designed to show that `git merge --abort` could
not always restore the index and working tree to the state they
were in before the merge started. The tests that were associated
with having changes in the index before the merge started are no
longer applicable, so they have been removed.
t7504: had a few tests that had stray staged changes that were not
actually part of the test under consideration
t6044: We no longer expect stray staged changes to sometimes result
in the merge continuing. Also, fix a case where a merge
didn't abort but should have.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
According to Documentation/git-merge.txt,
...[merge will] abort if there are any changes registered in the index
relative to the `HEAD` commit. (One exception is when the changed
index entries are in the state that would result from the merge
already.)
Add some tests showing that this exception, while it does accurately state
what would be a safe condition under which we could allow the merge to
proceed, is not what is actually implemented.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
`git merge-recursive` does a three-way merge between user-specified trees
base, head, and remote. Since the user is allowed to specify head, we can
not necesarily assume that head == HEAD.
Modify index_has_changes() to take an extra argument specifying the tree
to compare against. If NULL, it will compare to HEAD. We then use this
from merge-recursive to make sure we compare to the user-specified head.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
In commit 65170c07d4 ("merge-recursive: avoid incorporating uncommitted
changes in a merge", 2017-12-21), it was noted that there was a special
case when merge-recursive didn't rely on unpack_trees() to enforce the
index == HEAD requirement, and thus that it needed to do that enforcement
itself. Unfortunately, it returned the wrong exit status, signalling that
the merge completed but had conflicts, rather than that it was aborted.
Fix the return code, and while we're at it, change the error message to
match what unpack_trees() would have printed.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The `git merge-recursive` command allows the user to directly specify
three commits to merge -- base, head, and remote. (More than three can be
specified in the case of multiple merge bases.) Note that since the user
is allowed to specify head, it need not match HEAD.
Virtually every test and script in the current git.git codebase calls `git
merge-recursive` with head=HEAD, and likely external callers do as well,
which is why this has gone unnoticed. There is one notable
counter-example: git-stash.sh. However, git-stash called `git
merge-recursive` with an index that matches the expected merge result,
which happens to be a currently allowed exception to the "index must match
head" rule, so this never triggered an error previously.
Since we would like to tighten up the "index must match head" rule, we
need to make sure we are comparing to the correct head. Add a testcase
that demonstrates the failure when we check the wrong HEAD.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
After modify/delete merge conflict happens in a file skipped by sparse
checkout, "git reset --merge", which implements the "--abort" actions,
and "git reset --hard" fail with message "Entry * not uptodate. Cannot
update sparse checkout."
As explained in [1], the up-to-date checker mistakenly treats conflicted
entry which does not exist in HEAD as still skipped by sparse checkout.
Use the fix suggested in [1]. Also, add test case which verifies the
issue is fixed.
[1] https://public-inbox.org/git/20180616051444.GA29754@duynguyen.home/
Signed-off-by: Duy Nguyen <pclouds@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Max Kirillov <max@max630.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
If the user gives us a set that prepare_revision_walk()
takes to be empty, like:
git cherry-pick base..base
then we report an error. It's nonsense, and there's nothing
to pick.
But if they use revision options that later cull the list,
like:
git cherry-pick --author=nobody base~2..base
then we quietly create an empty todo list and return
success.
Arguably either behavior is acceptable, but we should
definitely be consistent about it. Reporting an error
seems to match the original intent, which dates all the way
back to 7e2bfd3f99 (revert: allow cherry-picking more than
one commit, 2010-06-02). That in turn was trying to match
the single-commit case that existed before then (and which
continues to issue an error).
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Acked-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Teach gc --auto to release pack files before auto packing the repository
to prevent failures when removing them.
Also teach the test 'fetching with auto-gc does not lock up' to complain
when it is no longer triggering an auto packing of the repository.
Fixes https://github.com/git-for-windows/git/issues/500
Signed-off-by: Kim Gybels <kgybels@infogroep.be>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Teach 'git grep --only-matching', a new option to only print the
matching part(s) of a line.
For instance, a line containing the following (taken from README.md:27):
(`man gitcvs-migration` or `git help cvs-migration` if git is
Is printed as follows:
$ git grep --line-number --column --only-matching -e git -- \
README.md | grep ":27"
README.md:27:7:git
README.md:27:16:git
README.md:27:38:git
The patch works mostly as one would expect, with the exception of a few
considerations that are worth mentioning here.
Like GNU grep, this patch ignores --only-matching when --invert (-v) is
given. There is a sensible answer here, but parity with the behavior of
other tools is preferred.
Because a line might contain more than one match, there are special
considerations pertaining to when to print line headers, newlines, and
how to increment the match column offset. The line header and newlines
are handled as a special case within the main loop to avoid polluting
the surrounding code with conditionals that have large blocks.
Signed-off-by: Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The commit that introduced the partial clone feature - 548719fbdc
("clone: partial clone", 2017-12-08) - excluded connectivity checks
for partial clones, but this also meant that it is possible for a clone
to succeed, yet not have all objects either present or promised.
Specifically, if cloning with --filter=blob:none from a repository that
has a tag pointing to a blob, and the blob is not sent in the packfile,
the clone will pass, even if the blob is not referenced by any tree in
the packfile.
Turn on connectivity checks for partial clone.
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
A filter line in a request to upload-pack filters out objects regardless
of whether they are directly referenced by a "want" line or not. This
means that cloning with "--filter=blob:none" (or another filter that
excludes blobs) from a repository with at least one ref pointing to a
blob (for example, the Git repository itself) results in output like the
following:
error: missing object referenced by 'refs/tags/junio-gpg-pub'
and if that particular blob is not referenced by a fetched tree, the
resulting clone fails fsck because there is no object from the remote to
vouch that the missing object is a promisor object.
Update both the protocol and the upload-pack implementation to include
all explicitly specified "want" objects in the packfile regardless of
the filter specification.
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
git send-email, when invoked without a --transfer-encoding option, sends
8bit data without a MIME version or a transfer encoding. This has
several downsides.
First, unless the transfer encoding is specified, it defaults to 7bit,
meaning that non-ASCII data isn't allowed. Second, if lines longer than
998 bytes are used, we will send an message that is invalid according to
RFC 5322. The --validate option, which is the default, catches this
issue, but it isn't clear to many people how to resolve this.
To solve these issues, default the transfer encoding to "auto", so that
we explicitly specify 8bit encoding when lines don't exceed 998 bytes
and quoted-printable otherwise. This means that we now always emit
Content-Transfer-Encoding and MIME-Version headers, so remove the
conditionals from this portion of the code.
It is unlikely that the unconditional inclusion of these two headers
will affect the deliverability of messages in anything but a positive
way, since MIME is already widespread and well understood by most email
programs.
Signed-off-by: brian m. carlson <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
With --validate (which is the default), we warn about lines exceeding
998 characters due to the limits specified in RFC 5322. However, if
we're using a suitable transfer encoding (quoted-printable or base64),
we're guaranteed not to have lines exceeding 76 characters, so there's
no need to fail in this case. The auto transfer encoding handles this
specific case, so accept it as well.
Signed-off-by: brian m. carlson <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
For most patches, using a transfer encoding of 8bit provides good
compatibility with most servers and makes it as easy as possible to view
patches. However, there are some patches for which 8bit is not a valid
encoding: RFC 5322 specifies that a message must not have lines
exceeding 998 octets.
Add a transfer encoding value, auto, which indicates that a patch should
use 8bit where allowed and quoted-printable otherwise. Choose
quoted-printable instead of base64, since base64-encoded plain text is
treated as suspicious by some spam filters.
Signed-off-by: brian m. carlson <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Recent version of PHP supports interface, trait, abstract class and
final class. This patch fixes the PHP hunk header regexp to support
all of these keywords.
Signed-off-by: Kana Natsuno <dev@whileimautomaton.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
A later patch changes the built-in PHP pattern. These test cases
demonstrate aspects of the pattern that we do not want to change.
Signed-off-by: Kana Natsuno <dev@whileimautomaton.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
There was a discussion of problematic directory/file conflicts with
virtual merge bases on the mailing list years ago at
https://public-inbox.org/git/AANLkTimwUQafGDrjxWrfU9uY1uKoFLJhxYs=vssOPqdf@mail.gmail.com/
Part of these corresponding tests made it into this testsuite. However,
the more problematic one didn't. And there are others that showcase the
problems even more. Add a very lengthy explanation, some of it from that
email, describing the tradeoffs in picking a recursive merge-base when
you're dealing with an add/add directory/file conflict.
The solution picked years ago is relatively good, but there is the
potential to do even better, assuming we're willing to pay a certain
performance cost.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
We don't need to use backslash continuation, as the "&&"
already provides continuation (and happily soaks up empty
lines between commands).
We can also expand the multi-line printf into a
here-document, which lets us use line breaks more naturally
(and avoids another continuation that required us to break
the natural indentation).
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
During negotiation, fetch-pack eventually reports as "have" lines all
commits reachable from all refs. Allow the user to restrict the commits
sent in this way by providing a whitelist of tips; only the tips
themselves and their ancestors will be sent.
Both globs and single objects are supported.
This feature is only supported for protocols that support connect or
stateless-connect (such as HTTP with protocol v2).
This will speed up negotiation when the repository has multiple
relatively independent branches (for example, when a repository
interacts with multiple repositories, such as with linux-next [1] and
torvalds/linux [2]), and the user knows which local branch is likely to
have commits in common with the upstream branch they are fetching.
[1] https://kernel.googlesource.com/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next/
[2] https://kernel.googlesource.com/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux/
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
When fetching, connectivity is checked after the shallow file is
updated. There are 2 issues with this: (1) the connectivity check is
only performed up to ancestors of existing refs (which is not thorough
enough if we were deepening an existing ref in the first place), and (2)
there is no rollback of the shallow file if the connectivity check
fails.
To solve (1), update the connectivity check to check the ancestry chain
completely in the case of a deepening fetch by refraining from passing
"--not --all" when invoking rev-list in connected.c.
To solve (2), have fetch_pack() perform its own connectivity check
before updating the shallow file. To support existing use cases in which
"git fetch-pack" is used to download objects without much regard as to
the connectivity of the resulting objects with respect to the existing
repository, the connectivity check is only done if necessary (that is,
the fetch is not a clone, and the fetch involves shallow/deepen
functionality). "git fetch" still performs its own connectivity check,
preserving correctness but sometimes performing redundant work. This
redundancy is mitigated by the fact that fetch_pack() reports if it has
performed a connectivity check itself, and if the transport supports
connect or stateless-connect, it will bubble up that report so that "git
fetch" knows not to perform the connectivity check in such a case.
This was noticed when a user tried to deepen an existing repository by
fetching with --no-shallow from a server that did not send all necessary
objects - the connectivity check as run by "git fetch" succeeded, but a
subsequent "git fsck" failed.
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
When for-each-ref is used with --ignore-case, we expect
match_name_as_path() to do a case-insensitive match. But
there's an extra layer of filtering that happens before we
even get there. Since commit cfe004a5a9 (ref-filter: limit
traversal to prefix, 2017-05-22), we feed the prefix to the
ref backend so that it can optimize the ref iteration.
There's no mechanism for us to tell the backend we're matching
case-insensitively. Nor is there likely to be one anytime soon,
since the packed backend relies on binary-searching the sorted list
of refs. Let's just punt on this case. The extra filtering is an
optimization that we simply can't do. We'll still give the correct
answer via the filtering in match_name_as_path().
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The --ignore-case option was added by 3bb16a8bf2 (tag,
branch, for-each-ref: add --ignore-case for sorting and
filtering, 2016-12-04), but it was never tested. And indeed,
it does not work due to multiple bugs (which will be fixed
in subsequent patches).
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Each rename is a lego: the source side could be connected to a delete or
another rename, and the destination side could be connected to a rename or a
conflicting add. Previous tests combined these to get e.g.
rename/rename(1to2)/add/add, rename/rename(2to1)/delete/delete, and
rename/add/delete. But we can also build bigger chains of conflicts. Add a
testcase demonstrating this.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
If either side of a rename/rename(2to1) conflict is itself also involved
in a rename/delete conflict, then the conflict is a little more complex;
we can even have what I'd call a rename/rename(2to1)/delete/delete
conflict. (In some ways, this is similar to a rename/rename(1to2)/add/add
conflict, as added in commit 3672c97148 ("merge-recursive: Fix working
copy handling for rename/rename/add/add", 2011-08-11)). Add a testcase
for such a conflict.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
If a file is renamed on one side of history, and the other side of history
both deletes the original file and adds a new unrelated file in the way of
the rename, then we have what I call a rename/add/delete conflict. Add a
testcase covering this scenario.
Reported-by: Robert Dailey <rcdailey.lists@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
t6044 has lots of tests for verifying that merge will abort as expected
when there are changes staged before the merge starts. However, it only
checked for non-zero exit code, which could mean that the merge ran to
completion with conflicts. Check that the merge was actually correctly
aborted, i.e. that .git/MERGE_HEAD is not present.
This changes one of the tests from expect_success to expect_failure.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
This test employs a for-loop inside a subshell and correctly aborts the
loop and fails the test overall (via "exit 1") if any iteration of the
for-loop fails. Otherwise, it exits the subshell with an explicit but
entirely unnecessary "exit 0", presumably to indicate that all
iterations of the loop succeeded. The &&-chain is broken between the
for-loop and the "exit 0". Rather than fixing the &&-chain, just drop
the pointless "exit 0".
Signed-off-by: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
These tests reference non-existent object "c" when they really mean to
be referencing "C", however, these errors went unnoticed due to a broken
&&-chain later in the tests. Fix these errors, as well as the broken
&&-chains behind which they hid.
Reviewed-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
This test uses a subshell within a subshell but is formatted in such a
way as to suggests that the inner subshell is a sibling rather than a
child, which makes it difficult to digest the test's structure and
intent.
Worse, the inner subshell performs cleanup of actions from earlier in
the test, however, a failure between the initial actions and the cleanup
will prevent the cleanup from taking place.
Fix these problems by modernizing and simplifying the test and by using
test_when_finished() for the cleanup action.
Signed-off-by: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Take advantage of write_script() to abstract-away details of shell
script creation, thus allowing the reader to focus on script content.
Readability benefits, particularly in this case, since the script body
was buried in a noisy one-liner subshell responsible for emitting
boilerplate and body.
Signed-off-by: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
This test expects "git push" to fail, thus it manually inverts that
local expected failure into a successful exit code for the test overall.
In doing so, it intentionally breaks the &&-chain. Modernize by
replacing manual exit code management with test_must_fail() and a normal
&&-chain.
Signed-off-by: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
This test has been dysfunctional since it was added by 259f3ee296
(lib-submodule-update.sh: define tests for recursing into submodules,
2017-03-14), however, the problem went unnoticed due to a broken
&&-chain.
The test wants to verify that replacing a submodule containing a .git
directory will absorb the .git directory into the .git/modules/ of the
superproject, and then replace the working tree content appropriate to
the superproject. It is, therefore, incorrect to check if the
submodule content still exists since the submodule will have been
replaced by the content of the superproject.
Fix this by removing the submodule content check, which also happens
to be the line that broke the &&-chain.
While at it, fix broken &&-chains in a couple neighboring tests.
Helped-by: Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
These tests intentionally break the &&-chain after using 'unset' since
they don't know if 'unset' will succeed or fail and don't want a local
'unset' failure to fail the test overall. We can do better by using
sane_unset(), which can be linked into the &&-chain as usual.
Signed-off-by: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
These tests employ a noisy subshell (with missing &&-chain) to feed
input into Git commands or files:
(echo a; echo b; echo c) | git some-command ...
Simplify by taking advantage of test_write_lines():
test_write_lines a b c | git some-command ...
Signed-off-by: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
These tests manually coerce the exit code of invoked commands to
"success" when they don't care if the command succeeds or fails since
failure of those commands should not cause the test to fail overall.
In doing so, they intentionally break the &&-chain. Modernize by
replacing manual exit code management with test_might_fail() and a
normal &&-chain.
Signed-off-by: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
If there's a parsing error we'll already report it via the
usual fsck report() function (or not, if the user has asked
to skip this object or warning type). The error message from
the config parser just adds confusion. Let's suppress it.
Note that we didn't test this case at all, so I've added
coverage in t7415. We may end up toning down or removing
this fsck check in the future. So take this test as checking
what happens now with a focus on stderr, and not any
ironclad guarantee that we must detect and report parse
failures in the future.
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Test 8 in t5407 appears to be an accidental exact duplicate of of test 5;
the testcode is identical and has identical repo state, but the test
description is different and suggests that rebase -m followed by rebase
--skip was what was actually supposed to be tested. Modify the test to
include the -m option.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The code to try seeing if a fetch is necessary in a submodule
during a fetch with --recurse-submodules got confused when the path
to the submodule was changed in the range of commits in the
superproject, sometimes showing "(null)". This has been corrected.
* sb/fix-fetching-moved-submodules:
t5526: test recursive submodules when fetching moved submodules
submodule: fix NULL correctness in renamed broken submodules
Continuing with the idea to programmatically enumerate various
pieces of data required for command line completion, the codebase
has been taught to enumerate options prefixed with "--no-" to
negate them.
* nd/completion-negation:
completion: collapse extra --no-.. options
completion: suppress some -no- options
parse-options: option to let --git-completion-helper show negative form
When user edits the patch in "git add -p" and the user's editor is
set to strip trailing whitespaces indiscriminately, an empty line
that is unchanged in the patch would become completely empty
(instead of a line with a sole SP on it). The code introduced in
Git 2.17 timeframe failed to parse such a patch, but now it learned
to notice the situation and cope with it.
* pw/add-p-recount:
add -p: fix counting empty context lines in edited patches
