On Thu, Dec 27, 2012 at 01:55:56PM -0500, Alex Vandiver wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-12-27 at 10:51 -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> > > $ git stash
> > > foo: needs merge
> > > foo: needs merge
> > > foo: unmerged (aeaa7e5e87cf309a7368d5d92a71c1f9e6a8c9e7)
> > > foo: unmerged (a77fa514de2720c72c1a861de098595959a2c97a)
> > > foo: unmerged (4a622d2b991f1a19ba7be313a46dc6f03692cd0a)
> > > fatal: git-write-tree: error building trees
> > > Cannot save the current index state
> >
> > This is totally expected, isn't it?
> >
> > You do not save state in the middle of a conflict with "git stash"
> > (instead, you would "git stash" away your own work in progress
> > before you start operation that may create and leave conflicts).
>
> Apologies for not being clear. While being unable to stash is not
> unexpected, perhaps, "Cannot stash while resolving conflicts" or similar
> would be more understandable to the end user than the above.
Yeah, I think the outcome is reasonable, but that message is just
horrible. Something like this might be better:
diff --git a/git-stash.sh b/git-stash.sh
index 688e259..7ea425c 100755
--- a/git-stash.sh
+++ b/git-stash.sh
@@ -217,6 +217,12 @@ save_stash () {
stash_msg="$*"
+ if ! git diff-index --cached --diff-filter=U --quiet HEAD; then
+ echo >&2 "fatal: unable to stash unmerged entries:"
+ git diff-index --cached --diff-filter=U --name-status HEAD
+ exit 1
+ fi
+
git update-index -q --refresh
if no_changes
then
but I suspect it is not sufficient:
1. There are other code paths that will end up in write-tree which
should probably be protected, too.
2. Unmerged entries are only one reason that write-tree might fail.
It's OK not to catch them all (since ultimately write-tree will
complain if need be), but we may want to also handle intent-to-add
entries with a nicer message.
-Peff
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html