lidongyan <502024330056@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > I could add this test case into my patch. Though I don’t understand >> + git rev-parse HEAD >.git/MERGE_HEAD && That was not about telling "show --merge" to work on any meaningful data and to produce any useful output. I knew the step to prepare for "show --merge" was leaky, so I gave a very minimum that can tickle that codepath. I wasn't of course proud of the direct manipulation of the filesystem (as recent "git update-ref MERGE_HEAD HEAD" would not even allow us to do this, sheesh, not very convenient). If you came up with a sequence that produces a situation to use the "git show --merge" command in a more realistic way, like below, that is wonderful. > If HEAD is equal to MERGE_HEAD. Would git show —merge still > works as usual? How about something like this > > diff --git a/t/t7007-show.sh b/t/t7007-show.sh > index d6cc69e0f2..f693b6e24b 100755 > --- a/t/t7007-show.sh > +++ b/t/t7007-show.sh > @@ -167,4 +167,28 @@ test_expect_success 'show --graph is forbidden' ' > test_must_fail git show --graph HEAD > ' > > +test_expect_success 'unmerged index' ' > + git reset --hard && > + > + git switch -C base && > + echo "base" > conflicting && > + git add conflicting && > + git commit -m "base" && > + > + git branch hello && > + git branch goodbye && > + > + git switch hello && > + echo "hello" > conflicting && > + git commit -am "hello" && > + > + git switch goodbye && > + echo "goodbye" > conflicting && > + git commit -am "goodbye" && > + > + git switch hello && > + test_must_fail git merge goodbye && > + git show --merge HEAD > +' > + > test_done
