Re: [PATCH v4 2/5] stash: Add a test for when apply fails during stash branch

[Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>]

Joel Teichroeb <joel@teichroeb.net> writes:

> If the return value of merge recurisve is not checked, the stash could end
> up being dropped even though it was not applied properly

s/recurisve/recursive/

> Signed-off-by: Joel Teichroeb <joel@teichroeb.net>
> ---
>  t/t3903-stash.sh | 14 ++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 14 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/t/t3903-stash.sh b/t/t3903-stash.sh
> index cc923e6335..5399fb05ca 100755
> --- a/t/t3903-stash.sh
> +++ b/t/t3903-stash.sh
> @@ -656,6 +656,20 @@ test_expect_success 'stash branch should not drop the stash if the branch exists
>  	git rev-parse stash@{0} --
>  '
>  
> +test_expect_success 'stash branch should not drop the stash if the apply fails' '
> +	git stash clear &&
> +	git reset HEAD~1 --hard &&
> +	echo foo >file &&
> +	git add file &&
> +	git commit -m initial &&

It's not quite intuitive to call a non-root commit "initial" ;-)

> +	echo bar >file &&
> +	git stash &&
> +	echo baz >file &&

OK, so 'file' has 'foo' in HEAD, 'bar' in the stash@{0}.

> +	test_when_finished "git checkout master" &&
> +	test_must_fail git stash branch new_branch stash@{0} &&

Hmph.  Do we blindly checkout new_branch out of stash@{0}^1 and
unstash, but because 'file' in the working tree is dirty, we fail to
apply the stash and stop?

This sounds like a bug to me.  Shouldn't we be staying on 'master',
and fail without even creating 'new_branch', when this happens?

In any case we should be testing what branch we are on after this
step.  What branch should we be on after "git stash branch" fails?

> +	git rev-parse stash@{0} --
> +'
> +
>  test_expect_success 'stash apply shows status same as git status (relative to current directory)' '
>  	git stash clear &&
>  	echo 1 >subdir/subfile1 &&