Why does `git stash -p` sometimes fail?
GitGit StashGit Problem Overview
I ♥ git stash -p. But sometimes, after a satisfying session of y, n, and s, I get this:
Saved working directory and index state WIP on foo: 9794c1a lorum ipsum
error: patch failed: spec/models/thing_spec.rb:65
error: spec/models/thing_spec.rb: patch does not apply
Cannot remove worktree changes
Why?
Git Solutions
Solution 1 - Git
This happens for me any time I try to split a hunk into smaller hunks that are too close together (less than 3 lines between changes). The short explanation is that the patch has context lines in it that conflict with your local changes. More complete explanation below.
Suppose I have a git repo with these uncommitted changes:
--- a/pangram
+++ b/pangram
@@ -1,8 +1,8 @@
The
-quick
+relatively quick
brown
fox
-jumps
+walks
over
the
lazy
If I stash the first change, I get:
--- a/pangram
+++ b/pangram
@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
The
-quick
+relatively quick
brown
fox
jumps
The git stash command actually does succeed in saving the patch (check git stash list), but then git uses that patch in reverse to remove the stashed changes from my working dir. The context after the hunk has "jumps", which doesn't match the "walks" still in my working dir. So git bails out with
error: patch failed: pangram:1 error: pangram: patch does not apply Cannot remove worktree changesand leaves all the changes in my working dir, and the stash becomes pretty much worthless.
I would call this a bug in git's hunk splitting support. If it knows it's splitting the changes too close, it could shave off a few lines of context from the patch, or jimmy the patch to have the modified context lines instead of the pristine ones. Alternatively, if splitting hunks this close is officially unsupported, it should actually refuse to split hunks that close.
Solution 2 - Git
git stash -p should fail less with Git 2.17 (Q2 2018).
Before that, "git add -p" (which shares logic with git stash) has been lazy in coalescing split patches before passing the result to underlying "git apply", leading to corner case bugs; the logic to prepare the patch to be applied after hunk selections has been tightened.
See commit 3a8522f, commit b3e0fcf, commit 2b8ea7f (05 Mar 2018), commit fecc6f3, commit 23fea4c, commit 902f414 (01 Mar 2018), and commit 11489a6, commit e4d671c, commit 492e60c (19 Feb 2018) by Phillip Wood (phillipwood).
(Merged by Junio C Hamano -- gitster -- in commit 436d18f, 14 Mar 2018)
> ## add -p: adjust offsets of subsequent hunks when one is skipped
(add, but again, can be applied to stash)
> Since commit 8cbd431 ("git-add--interactive: replace hunk
recounting with apply --recount", 2008-7-2, Git v1.6.0-rc0) if a hunk is skipped then we rely on the context lines to apply subsequent hunks in the right
place.
>
> While this works most of the time it is possible for hunks to
end up being applied in the wrong place.
>
> To fix this adjust the offset
of subsequent hunks to correct for any change in the number of
insertions or deletions due to the skipped hunk. The change in offset
due to edited hunks that have the number of insertions or deletions
changed is ignored here, it will be fixed in the next commit.
You can see some tests here.
Git 2.19 improves git add -p: 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.
See commit f4d35a6 (11 Jun 2018) by Phillip Wood (phillipwood).
(Merged by Junio C Hamano -- gitster -- in commit 5eb8da8, 28 Jun 2018)
> ## add -p: fix counting empty context lines in edited patches
> recount_edited_hunk() introduced in commit 2b8ea7f ("add -p:
calculate offset delta for edited patches", 2018-03-05, Git v2.17.0) required all context lines to start with a space, empty lines are not counted.
This was intended to avoid any recounting problems if the user had introduced empty lines at the end when editing the patch.
>
> However this introduced a regression into 'git add -p' as it seems it is common for editors to strip the trailing whitespace from empty context lines when patches are edited thereby introducing empty lines that should be
counted.
'git apply' knows how to deal with such empty lines and POSIX states that whether or not there is an space on an empty context line is implementation defined (see diff command).
>
> Fix the regression by counting lines that consist solely of a newline
as well as lines starting with a space as context lines and add a test
to prevent future regressions.
Git 2.23 (Q3 2019) improves the git add -p, used by "git checkout -p" which needs to selectively apply a patch in reverse: it did not work well before.
See commit 2bd69b9 (12 Jun 2019) by Phillip Wood (phillipwood).
(Merged by Junio C Hamano -- gitster -- in commit 1b074e1, 09 Jul 2019)
> ## add -p: fix checkout -p with pathological context
> Commit fecc6f3 ("add -p: adjust offsets of subsequent hunks when one is
skipped", 2018-03-01, Git v2.17.0-rc0) fixed adding hunks in the correct place when a previous hunk has been skipped.
>
> However it did not address patches that are applied in reverse.
>
> In that case we need to adjust the pre-image offset so that when apply reverses the patch the post-image offset is adjusted correctly.
We subtract rather than add the delta as the patch is reversed (the easiest way to think about it is to consider a hunk of deletions that is skipped - in that case we want to reduce offset so we need to subtract).
With Git 2.25 (Q1 2020), The effort to move "git-add--interactive" Perl script to C continues.
As a result, the fixes mentioned above are re-implemented.
See commit 2e40831, commit 54d9d9b, commit ade246e, commit d6cf873, commit 9254bdf, commit bcdd297, commit b38dd9e, commit 11f2c0d, commit 510aeca, commit 0ecd9d2, commit 5906d5d, commit 47dc4fd, commit 80399ae, commit 7584dd3, commit 12c24cf, commit 25ea47a, commit e3bd11b, commit 1942ee4, commit f6aa7ec (13 Dec 2019) by Johannes Schindelin (dscho).
(Merged by Junio C Hamano -- gitster -- in commit 45b96a6, 25 Dec 2019)
> ## built-in add -p: adjust hunk headers as needed
> Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin
> When skipping a hunk that adds a different number of lines than it removes, we need to adjust the subsequent hunk headers of non-skipped hunks: in pathological cases, the context is not enough to determine precisely where the patch should be applied.
>
> This problem was identified in 23fea4c240 ("t3701: add failing test for pathological context lines", 2018-03-01, Git v2.17.0-rc0 -- merge ) and fixed in the Perl version in fecc6f3a68 ("add -p: adjust offsets of subsequent hunks when one is skipped", 2018-03-01, Git v2.17.0-rc0 -- merge).
>
> And this patch fixes it in the C version of git add -p.
>
> In contrast to the Perl version, we try to keep the extra text on the hunk header (which typically contains the signature of the function whose code is changed in the hunk) intact.
>
> Note: while the C version does not support staging mode changes at this stage, we already prepare for this by simply skipping the hunk header if both old and new offset is 0 (this cannot happen for regular hunks, and we will use this as an indicator that we are looking at a special hunk).
>
> Likewise, we already prepare for hunk splitting by handling the absence of extra text in the hunk header gracefully: only the first split hunk will have that text, the others will not (indicated by an empty extra text start/end range). Preparing for hunk splitting already at this stage avoids an indentation change of the entire hunk header-printing block later, and is almost as easy to review as without that handling.
Before Git 2.27 (Q2 2020), allowing the user to split a patch hunk while "git stash -p" does not work well; a band-aid has been added to make this (partially) work better.
See commit 7723436, commit 121c0d4 (08 Apr 2020) by Johannes Schindelin (dscho).
(Merged by Junio C Hamano -- gitster -- in commit e81ecff, 28 Apr 2020)
> ## stash -p: (partially) fix bug concerning split hunks
> Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin
> When trying to stash part of the worktree changes by splitting a hunk and then only partially accepting the split bits and pieces, the user is presented with a rather cryptic error:
>
> error: patch failed: stash ref was actually updated correctly).
>
> We even have a test case demonstrating that failure, carrying it for four years already.
>
> The explanation: when splitting a hunk, the changed lines are no longer separated by more than 3 lines (which is the amount of context lines Git's diffs use by default), but less than that.
>
> So when staging only part of the diff hunk for stashing, the resulting diff that we want to apply to the worktree in reverse will contain those changes to be dropped surrounded by three context lines, but since the diff is relative to HEAD rather than to the worktree, these context lines will not match.
>
> Example time. Let's assume that the file README contains these lines:
>
> We
> the
> people
>
> and the worktree added some lines so that it contains these lines instead:
>
> We
> are
> the
> kind
> people
>
> and the user tries to stash the line containing "are", then the command will internally stage this line to a temporary index file and try to revert the diff between HEAD and that index file.
The diff hunk that git stash tries to revert will look somewhat like this:
> @@ -1776,3 +1776,4
> We
> +are
> the
> people
>
> It is obvious, now, that the trailing context lines overlap with the part of the original diff hunk that the user did not want to stash.
>
> Keeping in mind that context lines in diffs serve the primary purpose of finding the exact location when the diff does not apply precisely (but when the exact line number in the file to be patched differs from the line number indicated in the diff), we work around this by reducing the amount of context lines: the diff was just generated.
>
> Note: this is not a full fix for the issue.
Just as demonstrated in t3701's 'add -p works with pathological context lines' test case, there are ambiguities in the diff format. It is very rare in practice, of course, to encounter such repeated lines.
>
> The full solution for such cases would be to replace the approach of generating a diff from the stash and then applying it in reverse by emulating git revert (i.e. doing a 3-way merge). However, in git stash -p it would not apply to HEAD but instead to the worktree, which makes this non-trivial to implement as long as we also maintain a scripted version of add -i.
Git 2.29 (Q4 2020) brings a leakfix to git add -p (used by stash -p)
See commit 324efcf (07 Sep 2020) by Phillip Wood (phillipwood).
(Merged by Junio C Hamano -- gitster -- in commit 3ad8d3e, 18 Sep 2020)
> ## add -p: fix memory leak
> Signed-off-by: Phillip Wood
> Acked-by: Johannes Schindelin
> asan reports that the C version of add -p is not freeing all the memory it allocates.
>
> Fix this by introducing a function to clear struct add_p_state`` and use it instead of freeing individual members.
Solution 3 - Git
After just having a git stash -p fail in this same way, I had luck with this workaround (git 2.0.2):
git add -p, splitting the exact same hunks but with inverse answers ("y" toadd"keeps" changes, "n" tostashkeeps changes.)git stash -kto keep the index and stash everything elsegit resetto continue working on my files
I'm not sure why git add -p didn't fail in the same way that git stash -p did. I guess because adding works with the index rather than creating a patch file?
Solution 4 - Git
The accepted answer at the moment can still unfortunately fail, even in Git 2.17.
If, like me, you spent a lot of effort constructing the perfect stash and don't want to throw that effort away, it is still possible to mostly get what you want with:
git stash show -p | patch -p1 -R
This will fail with rejects, but odds are good most of the hunks will apply correctly and at least save you the time of reviewing all the files again.