Thread (6 messages) flat view 6 messages, 2 authors, 2016-06-15

Re: Bug in fetch-pack.c, please confirm

From: Jeff King <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 23:04:12

Possibly related (same subject, not in this thread)

On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 12:01:26PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
quoted
I'm working up a few patches in that area, which I'll send out in a few
minutes. Once that is done, then I think the explanation you give above
would be correct.
If a follow-up is coming then I'd just drop this one.  Thanks.
OK, here it is. Took me a bit longer than I expected, as I wanted to
figure out whether the second patch was actually fixing a bug (and if
so, to add test coverage). Turns out that it is a real bug.

The final patch is what you sent, rebased on top (though there are not
any code changes; the underlying commits make the _explanation_ true,
but no code change was required). I fixed up the nits I mentioned in my
earlier email.

  [1/4]: filter_ref: avoid overwriting ref->old_sha1 with garbage
  [2/4]: filter_ref: make a copy of extra "sought" entries
  [3/4]: fetch_refs_via_pack: free extra copy of refs
  [4/4]: fetch-pack: remove dead assignment to ref->new_sha1

-Peff
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help