From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/14] lockfile: introduce flag for locks outside .git Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2014 18:57:42 -0500 Message-ID: <20141203235742.GA7387@peff.net> References: <1416262453-30349-1-git-send-email-sbeller@google.com> <20141117233525.GC4336@google.com> <20141118004841.GE4336@google.com> <20141203050217.GJ6527@google.com> <20141203051911.GP6527@google.com> <20141203232951.GJ6527@google.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: Junio C Hamano , Stefan Beller , git@vger.kernel.org, Michael Haggerty To: Jonathan Nieder X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Dec 04 00:57:52 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1XwJnq-0001I1-ED for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Thu, 04 Dec 2014 00:57:50 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752142AbaLCX5q (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Dec 2014 18:57:46 -0500 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([50.56.180.127]:48070 "HELO cloud.peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1751959AbaLCX5p (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Dec 2014 18:57:45 -0500 Received: (qmail 32484 invoked by uid 102); 3 Dec 2014 23:57:45 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.1) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with SMTP; Wed, 03 Dec 2014 17:57:45 -0600 Received: (qmail 1871 invoked by uid 107); 3 Dec 2014 23:57:46 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with SMTP; Wed, 03 Dec 2014 18:57:46 -0500 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Wed, 03 Dec 2014 18:57:42 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20141203232951.GJ6527@google.com> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Wed, Dec 03, 2014 at 03:29:51PM -0800, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > Junio C Hamano wrote: > > > I tried to merge the 14-patch series with obvious fix-ups after > > dropping the rerere abortion change you sent separately and in > > duplicate and also dropping sb/copy-fd, but I've ran out of patience > > with this step, at least for today's integration cycle. Should we > > also drop jk/lock-ref-sha1-basec-return-errors topic as well? > > I don't mind adding it to the series. Please do add it in, rather than dropping it. It fixes a real racy condition in which "pack-refs --prune" wants to lock a ref only to prune it, and it's OK to continue on if the lock fails (without that patch, pack-refs dies prematurely). -Peff