From: mhagger@alum.mit.edu
To: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Jeff King <peff@peff.net>,
cmn@elego.de, A Large Angry SCM <gitzilla@gmail.com>,
Daniel Barkalow <barkalow@iabervon.org>,
Sverre Rabbelier <srabbelier@gmail.com>,
Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu>
Subject: [RFC 00/13] Checking full vs. partial refnames
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 22:55:03 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1319057716-28094-1-git-send-email-mhagger@alum.mit.edu> (raw)
From: Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu>
There are many places where it is necessary to determine whether a
refname is a complete, valid, top-level reference name in the "refs/"
tree, one of the special refnames like "HEAD" or "FETCH_HEAD", or
whether it is potentially a valid fragment of a refname that can be
DWIMed into a true reference. Until now such checks have been
incomplete and/or scattered around.
The first three patches in this series beef up check_refname_format()
(and adds another static function, parse_refname_prefix()) with the
ability to make such checks when the REFNAME_FULL flag is used.
The fourth patch removes the checking of refnames passed to
add_extra_ref(), allowing the function to tolerate oddities like
"refs/tags/3.1.1.1^{}".
The rest of the patches consist of wild-assed guesses about some
callers of check_refname_format() that I suppose can use the
REFNAME_FULL option, thereby tightening up what they accept. About
all I can say is that the test suite passes with these patches
applied. But recent experience indicates that the test suite has a
lot of holes. Therefore, it would be great if experts would look over
these suggestions.
There are many other callers of check_refname_format() that I haven't
touched, because I'm not even brave enough to make wild-assed guesses
about them. (Since I left them without the REFNAME_FULL option, they
rather allow too many references through than too few.) It would be
great if a more experienced developer would look at the other callers
and decide which need to be changed.
BTW, this patch series does *not* fix the specific problem that Junio
mentioned (that "git update-ref tmp/junk HEAD" does not reject the
bogus refname), nor probably many others. The gruelling work is not
this patch series; it is the effort of tracking down all of the code
paths that might try to pass bogus refnames to the refs API.
This patch series applies on top of jc/check-ref-format-fixup, and
also rebases smoothly to the current "next".
Michael Haggerty (13):
check_refname_component(): iterate via index rather than via pointer
parse_refname_prefix(): new function
Teach check_refname_format() to check full refnames
add_ref(): move the call of check_refname_format() to callers
receive-pack::update(): use check_refname_format(..., REFNAME_FULL)
strbuf_check_branch_ref(): use check_refname_format(...,
REFNAME_FULL)
one_local_ref(): use check_refname_format(..., REFNAME_FULL)
expand_namespace(): the refname is full, so use REFNAME_FULL option
new_branch(): verify that new branch name is a valid full refname
strbuf_check_tag_ref(): the refname is full, so use REFNAME_FULL
option
replace_object(): the refname is full, so use REFNAME_FULL option
resolve_ref: use check_refname_format(..., REFNAME_FULL)
filter_refs(): the refname is full, so use REFNAME_FULL option
Documentation/git-check-ref-format.txt | 14 ++++
builtin/check-ref-format.c | 4 +
builtin/fetch-pack.c | 2 +-
builtin/receive-pack.c | 2 +-
builtin/replace.c | 2 +-
builtin/tag.c | 2 +-
environment.c | 2 +-
fast-import.c | 2 +-
refs.c | 124 ++++++++++++++++++++------------
refs.h | 12 ++-
remote.c | 2 +-
sha1_name.c | 2 +-
t/t1402-check-ref-format.sh | 31 ++++++++
13 files changed, 143 insertions(+), 58 deletions(-)
--
1.7.7
next reply other threads:[~2011-10-19 20:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-10-19 20:55 mhagger [this message]
2011-10-19 20:55 ` [RFC 01/13] check_refname_component(): iterate via index rather than via pointer mhagger
2011-10-19 20:55 ` [RFC 02/13] parse_refname_prefix(): new function mhagger
2011-10-19 20:55 ` [RFC 03/13] Teach check_refname_format() to check full refnames mhagger
2011-10-19 20:55 ` [RFC 04/13] add_ref(): move the call of check_refname_format() to callers mhagger
2011-10-19 21:49 ` Junio C Hamano
2011-10-19 21:59 ` Michael Haggerty
2011-10-19 20:55 ` [RFC 05/13] receive-pack::update(): use check_refname_format(..., REFNAME_FULL) mhagger
2011-10-19 20:55 ` [RFC 06/13] strbuf_check_branch_ref(): " mhagger
2011-10-19 20:55 ` [RFC 07/13] one_local_ref(): " mhagger
2011-10-19 20:55 ` [RFC 08/13] expand_namespace(): the refname is full, so use REFNAME_FULL option mhagger
2011-10-19 20:55 ` [RFC 09/13] new_branch(): verify that new branch name is a valid full refname mhagger
2011-10-19 21:52 ` Junio C Hamano
2011-10-19 20:55 ` [RFC 10/13] strbuf_check_tag_ref(): the refname is full, so use REFNAME_FULL option mhagger
2011-10-19 20:55 ` [RFC 11/13] replace_object(): " mhagger
2011-10-19 20:55 ` [RFC 12/13] resolve_ref: use check_refname_format(..., REFNAME_FULL) mhagger
2011-10-19 20:55 ` [RFC 13/13] filter_refs(): the refname is full, so use REFNAME_FULL option mhagger
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1319057716-28094-1-git-send-email-mhagger@alum.mit.edu \
--to=mhagger@alum.mit.edu \
--cc=barkalow@iabervon.org \
--cc=cmn@elego.de \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=gitzilla@gmail.com \
--cc=peff@peff.net \
--cc=srabbelier@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).