From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] Fix random sha1 in error message in http-fetch and http-push Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2007 14:17:53 -0800 Message-ID: <7vbq8sq5ta.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <1197667081-9909-1-git-send-email-mh@glandium.org> <1197667081-9909-2-git-send-email-mh@glandium.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: Mike Hommey X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Dec 14 23:18:32 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1J3IrX-0007C4-8K for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Fri, 14 Dec 2007 23:18:31 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933753AbXLNWSL (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Dec 2007 17:18:11 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932941AbXLNWSL (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Dec 2007 17:18:11 -0500 Received: from a-sasl-quonix.sasl.smtp.pobox.com ([208.72.237.25]:65398 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757711AbXLNWSJ (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Dec 2007 17:18:09 -0500 Received: from a-sasl-quonix (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D8FE07705; Fri, 14 Dec 2007 17:18:04 -0500 (EST) Received: from pobox.com (ip68-225-240-77.oc.oc.cox.net [68.225.240.77]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F9CC7704; Fri, 14 Dec 2007 17:18:01 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <1197667081-9909-2-git-send-email-mh@glandium.org> (Mike Hommey's message of "Fri, 14 Dec 2007 22:18:01 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Mike Hommey writes: > Please note that this is already fixed in my strbuf patch for these files, > which had been applied in pu, but it seems to have disappeared from pu's > history. This also means the strbuf patch conflicts with this one. Please > tell me if you want a new strbuf patch made after this one. The branch 'pu' almost always rewind and gets rebuilt from the tip of 'next'. Since I am more worried about master and next, even more so than usual these days, most of the backburnered topics are not even in 'pu' but I still keep tips of them not to lose (they are found in 'offcuts'). Give me a few days to get back to your series. I think it is a series of good clean-up patches, (I just read [1/2] which was trivially correct although I am not sure if it is the optimum fix to sprinkle free(url) to everywhere we have return), but I just haven't got around to them.