Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] remote.c: remove BUG in show_push_unqualified_ref_name_error()
From: Patrick Steinhardt <hidden>
Date: 2025-08-05 13:28:03
On Mon, Aug 04, 2025 at 11:24:40PM -0700, Denton Liu wrote:
When "git push <remote> <src>:<dst>" does not spell out the destination side of the ref fully, and when <src> is not given as a reference but an object name, the code tries to give advice messages based on the type of that object. The type is determined by calling odb_read_object_info() and signalled by its return value. The code however reported a programming error with BUG() when this function said that there is no such object, which happens when the object name is given as a full hexadecimal (if the object name is given as a partial hexadecimal or an non-existing ref, the function would have died without returning, so this BUG() wouldn't have triggered). This is wrong. It is an ordinary end-user mistake to give an object name that does not exist and treated as such.
Yup, makes sense.
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
diff --git a/remote.c b/remote.c index e965f022f1..4ad20110e9 100644 --- a/remote.c +++ b/remote.c@@ -1218,8 +1218,7 @@ static void show_push_unqualified_ref_name_error(const char *dst_value, "'%s:refs/tags/%s'?"), matched_src_name, dst_value); } else { - BUG("'%s' should be commit/tag/tree/blob, is '%d'", - matched_src_name, type); + advise(_("The <src> part of the refspec is an oid that doesn't exist.\n"));
I think we should rather say "object ID", as "oid" is an abbreviation that might not be immediately obvious to the user. Also, should we continue to mention the object ID? Otherwise it might be hard for the user to figure out which object ID doesn't exist in case they pass multiple refspecs. Patrick