* [PATCH] fetch: don't try to update unfetched tracking refs
@ 2013-05-27 11:40 John Keeping
2013-05-27 15:42 ` Jeff King
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: John Keeping @ 2013-05-27 11:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: git; +Cc: Jeff King, John Keeping
Since commit f269048 (fetch: opportunistically update tracking refs,
2013-05-11) we update tracking refs opportunistically when fetching
remote branches. However, if a refspec is given on the command line
that does not include a configured (non-pattern) refspec a fatal error
occurs.
Fix this by setting the "missing_ok" flag when calling get_fetch_map.
Signed-off-by: John Keeping <john@keeping.me.uk>
---
builtin/fetch.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/builtin/fetch.c b/builtin/fetch.c
index e41cc0d..d15a734 100644
--- a/builtin/fetch.c
+++ b/builtin/fetch.c
@@ -183,7 +183,7 @@ static struct ref *get_ref_map(struct transport *transport,
old_tail = tail;
for (i = 0; i < transport->remote->fetch_refspec_nr; i++)
get_fetch_map(ref_map, &transport->remote->fetch[i],
- &tail, 0);
+ &tail, 1);
for (rm = *old_tail; rm; rm = rm->next)
rm->fetch_head_status = FETCH_HEAD_IGNORE;
} else {
--
1.8.3.rc3.438.gb3e4ae3
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] fetch: don't try to update unfetched tracking refs
2013-05-27 11:40 [PATCH] fetch: don't try to update unfetched tracking refs John Keeping
@ 2013-05-27 15:42 ` Jeff King
2013-05-27 16:01 ` John Keeping
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Jeff King @ 2013-05-27 15:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: John Keeping; +Cc: git
On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 12:40:25PM +0100, John Keeping wrote:
> Since commit f269048 (fetch: opportunistically update tracking refs,
> 2013-05-11) we update tracking refs opportunistically when fetching
> remote branches. However, if a refspec is given on the command line
> that does not include a configured (non-pattern) refspec a fatal error
> occurs.
I'm not sure I understand what the last sentence means. I tried to add a
test like:
diff --git a/t/t5510-fetch.sh b/t/t5510-fetch.sh
index ff43e08..02e30e1 100755
--- a/t/t5510-fetch.sh
+++ b/t/t5510-fetch.sh
@@ -422,6 +422,16 @@ test_expect_success 'configured fetch updates tracking' '
)
'
+test_expect_success 'non-configured ref does not confuse tracking update' '
+ cd "$D" &&
+ git update-ref refs/odd/location HEAD &&
+ (
+ cd three &&
+ git fetch origin refs/odd/location &&
+ git rev-parse --verify FETCH_HEAD
+ )
+'
+
test_expect_success 'pushing nonexistent branch by mistake should not segv' '
cd "$D" &&
but it does not fail with the existing code. Can you give an example
that fails?
-Peff
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] fetch: don't try to update unfetched tracking refs
2013-05-27 15:42 ` Jeff King
@ 2013-05-27 16:01 ` John Keeping
2013-05-27 16:19 ` Jeff King
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: John Keeping @ 2013-05-27 16:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jeff King; +Cc: git
On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 11:42:52AM -0400, Jeff King wrote:
> On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 12:40:25PM +0100, John Keeping wrote:
>
> > Since commit f269048 (fetch: opportunistically update tracking refs,
> > 2013-05-11) we update tracking refs opportunistically when fetching
> > remote branches. However, if a refspec is given on the command line
> > that does not include a configured (non-pattern) refspec a fatal error
> > occurs.
>
> I'm not sure I understand what the last sentence means. I tried to add a
> test like:
>
> diff --git a/t/t5510-fetch.sh b/t/t5510-fetch.sh
> index ff43e08..02e30e1 100755
> --- a/t/t5510-fetch.sh
> +++ b/t/t5510-fetch.sh
> @@ -422,6 +422,16 @@ test_expect_success 'configured fetch updates tracking' '
> )
> '
>
> +test_expect_success 'non-configured ref does not confuse tracking update' '
> + cd "$D" &&
> + git update-ref refs/odd/location HEAD &&
> + (
> + cd three &&
> + git fetch origin refs/odd/location &&
> + git rev-parse --verify FETCH_HEAD
> + )
> +'
> +
> test_expect_success 'pushing nonexistent branch by mistake should not segv' '
>
> cd "$D" &&
>
> but it does not fail with the existing code. Can you give an example
> that fails?
I have this in my .git/config for git.git:
[remote "origin"]
url = git://github.com/gitster/git
fetch = +refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/origin/*
fetch = +refs/notes/amlog:refs/notes/amlog
Then doing "git fetch origin master" fails because:
fatal: Couldn't find remote ref refs/notes/amlog
The following test fails for me (and passes with my patch) - note that
in "two", remote.one.fetch is configured as
"refs/heads/master:refs/heads/one".
-- >8 --
diff --git a/t/t5510-fetch.sh b/t/t5510-fetch.sh
index ff43e08..c540257 100755
--- a/t/t5510-fetch.sh
+++ b/t/t5510-fetch.sh
@@ -422,6 +422,19 @@ test_expect_success 'configured fetch updates tracking' '
)
'
+test_expect_success 'configured ref does not confuse tracking' '
+
+ cd "$D" &&
+ (
+ cd one &&
+ git branch -f side
+ ) &&
+ (
+ cd two &&
+ git fetch one side
+ )
+'
+
test_expect_success 'pushing nonexistent branch by mistake should not segv' '
cd "$D" &&
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] fetch: don't try to update unfetched tracking refs
2013-05-27 16:01 ` John Keeping
@ 2013-05-27 16:19 ` Jeff King
2013-05-27 16:33 ` [PATCH v2] " John Keeping
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Jeff King @ 2013-05-27 16:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: John Keeping; +Cc: git
On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 05:01:29PM +0100, John Keeping wrote:
> > I'm not sure I understand what the last sentence means. I tried to add a
> > test like:
> [...]
> > but it does not fail with the existing code. Can you give an example
> > that fails?
>
> I have this in my .git/config for git.git:
>
> [remote "origin"]
> url = git://github.com/gitster/git
> fetch = +refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/origin/*
> fetch = +refs/notes/amlog:refs/notes/amlog
Ah, I see. It is not "the refspec on the command-line does not match a
configured refspec", but rather "there exists a configured non-pattern
refspec that does not match what was on the command-line (even if what
was on the command-line did match another refspec)".
So your fix makes perfect sense. Do you mind squashing in this test
below? I think it is a little less subtle than what you posted, as it
sets up the situation explicitly in the test. It also checks that the
refs we _did_ match still get updated ("master" in this case).
diff --git a/t/t5510-fetch.sh b/t/t5510-fetch.sh
index ff43e08..fde6891 100755
--- a/t/t5510-fetch.sh
+++ b/t/t5510-fetch.sh
@@ -422,6 +422,22 @@ test_expect_success 'configured fetch updates tracking' '
)
'
+test_expect_success 'non-matching refspecs do not confuse tracking update' '
+ cd "$D" &&
+ git update-ref refs/odd/location HEAD &&
+ (
+ cd three &&
+ git update-ref refs/remotes/origin/master base-origin-master &&
+ git config --add remote.origin.fetch \
+ refs/odd/location:refs/remotes/origin/odd &&
+ o=$(git rev-parse --verify refs/remotes/origin/master) &&
+ git fetch origin master &&
+ n=$(git rev-parse --verify refs/remotes/origin/master) &&
+ test "$o" != "$n" &&
+ test_must_fail git rev-parse --verify refs/remotes/origin/odd
+ )
+'
+
test_expect_success 'pushing nonexistent branch by mistake should not segv' '
cd "$D" &&
Thanks for the fix.
Acked-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
-Peff
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* [PATCH v2] fetch: don't try to update unfetched tracking refs
2013-05-27 16:19 ` Jeff King
@ 2013-05-27 16:33 ` John Keeping
2013-05-27 16:35 ` Jeff King
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: John Keeping @ 2013-05-27 16:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jeff King; +Cc: git, Junio C Hamano
Since commit f269048 (fetch: opportunistically update tracking refs,
2013-05-11) we update tracking refs opportunistically when fetching
remote branches. However, if there is a configured non-pattern refspec
that does not match any of the refspecs given on the command line then a
fatal error occurs.
Fix this by setting the "missing_ok" flag when calling get_fetch_map.
Test-added-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: John Keeping <john@keeping.me.uk>
Acked-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
---
On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 12:19:34PM -0400, Jeff King wrote:
> On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 05:01:29PM +0100, John Keeping wrote:
>
> > > I'm not sure I understand what the last sentence means. I tried to add a
> > > test like:
> > [...]
> > > but it does not fail with the existing code. Can you give an example
> > > that fails?
> >
> > I have this in my .git/config for git.git:
> >
> > [remote "origin"]
> > url = git://github.com/gitster/git
> > fetch = +refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/origin/*
> > fetch = +refs/notes/amlog:refs/notes/amlog
>
> Ah, I see. It is not "the refspec on the command-line does not match a
> configured refspec", but rather "there exists a configured non-pattern
> refspec that does not match what was on the command-line (even if what
> was on the command-line did match another refspec)".
Exactly. I've changed the commit message to (hopefully) make this
clearer.
> So your fix makes perfect sense. Do you mind squashing in this test
> below? I think it is a little less subtle than what you posted, as it
> sets up the situation explicitly in the test. It also checks that the
> refs we _did_ match still get updated ("master" in this case).
Done.
builtin/fetch.c | 2 +-
t/t5510-fetch.sh | 16 ++++++++++++++++
2 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/builtin/fetch.c b/builtin/fetch.c
index e41cc0d..d15a734 100644
--- a/builtin/fetch.c
+++ b/builtin/fetch.c
@@ -183,7 +183,7 @@ static struct ref *get_ref_map(struct transport *transport,
old_tail = tail;
for (i = 0; i < transport->remote->fetch_refspec_nr; i++)
get_fetch_map(ref_map, &transport->remote->fetch[i],
- &tail, 0);
+ &tail, 1);
for (rm = *old_tail; rm; rm = rm->next)
rm->fetch_head_status = FETCH_HEAD_IGNORE;
} else {
diff --git a/t/t5510-fetch.sh b/t/t5510-fetch.sh
index ff43e08..fde6891 100755
--- a/t/t5510-fetch.sh
+++ b/t/t5510-fetch.sh
@@ -422,6 +422,22 @@ test_expect_success 'configured fetch updates tracking' '
)
'
+test_expect_success 'non-matching refspecs do not confuse tracking update' '
+ cd "$D" &&
+ git update-ref refs/odd/location HEAD &&
+ (
+ cd three &&
+ git update-ref refs/remotes/origin/master base-origin-master &&
+ git config --add remote.origin.fetch \
+ refs/odd/location:refs/remotes/origin/odd &&
+ o=$(git rev-parse --verify refs/remotes/origin/master) &&
+ git fetch origin master &&
+ n=$(git rev-parse --verify refs/remotes/origin/master) &&
+ test "$o" != "$n" &&
+ test_must_fail git rev-parse --verify refs/remotes/origin/odd
+ )
+'
+
test_expect_success 'pushing nonexistent branch by mistake should not segv' '
cd "$D" &&
--
1.8.3.rc3.438.gb3e4ae3
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH v2] fetch: don't try to update unfetched tracking refs
2013-05-27 16:33 ` [PATCH v2] " John Keeping
@ 2013-05-27 16:35 ` Jeff King
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Jeff King @ 2013-05-27 16:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: John Keeping; +Cc: git, Junio C Hamano
On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 05:33:09PM +0100, John Keeping wrote:
> > Ah, I see. It is not "the refspec on the command-line does not match a
> > configured refspec", but rather "there exists a configured non-pattern
> > refspec that does not match what was on the command-line (even if what
> > was on the command-line did match another refspec)".
>
> Exactly. I've changed the commit message to (hopefully) make this
> clearer.
It does. To me, anyway. :)
Thanks again.
-Peff
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2013-05-27 16:35 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2013-05-27 11:40 [PATCH] fetch: don't try to update unfetched tracking refs John Keeping
2013-05-27 15:42 ` Jeff King
2013-05-27 16:01 ` John Keeping
2013-05-27 16:19 ` Jeff King
2013-05-27 16:33 ` [PATCH v2] " John Keeping
2013-05-27 16:35 ` Jeff King
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).