On Wed, Jan 12 2022, Junio C Hamano wrote:

Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason  [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

This is a follow-up to the recently landed ab/refs-errno-cleanup
topic, I missed a spot and left some meaningless use of "errno" in the
refs (file) backend.

Is it a fix "oops the ones we merged to 'master' were buggy and
needs these on top to be correct"?

If it is merely a follow-up "I am doing more of the same thing as we
aimed to do in that topic", I'd rather leave it to the next cycle.

I'll come back to the topic to find it out from the patches
themselves, but after I dealt with other patches that are more
clearly fix-ups first.

3/3 isn't needed for v2.35.0, but I figured if you were queuing this
that obvious cleanup after the also-not-strictly-needed 2/3 made sense.

But I can leave both of those until after the release if you'd like.

I think we should have 1/3 for 2.35.0 as rationalized in its commit
message. I.e. I haven't found a way for that omission in my ef18119dec8
to break things in practice, but I'm also not confident that I thought
through all the potential cases. Changing that code to be obviously
correct in terms of the current API is an easy enough fix.

So just let me know how you'd like to proceed. I.e. I can re-roll a v2
with just 1/3, but I think this v1 is also good-to-go as-is. Thanks!