From: Daniel Barkalow <barkalow@iabervon.org>
To: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>,
"Randal L. Schwartz" <merlyn@stonehenge.com>
Subject: Re: recent change in git.git/master broke my repos
Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2007 14:05:20 -0400 (EDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0710251351330.7345@iabervon.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20071025165633.GA24143@coredump.intra.peff.net>
On Thu, 25 Oct 2007, Jeff King wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 25, 2007 at 07:32:36AM -0700, Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
>
> > I have echo "ref: refs/remotes/origin/master" >.git/refs/heads/upstream
> > so that my daily update script can go:
> >
> > git-fetch
> > if [ repo is on master, and is not dirty ];
> > git-merge upstream
> > fi
> >
> > Yesterday that worked.
> >
> > Today I get a rash of:
> >
> > fatal: Couldn't find remote ref refs/remotes/origin/master
> >
> > from my git-fetch.
>
> Randal and I discussed this a bit on IRC, and it turns out not to be
> related to the 'upstream' symref. Instead, he had a broken
> branch.master.merge config that pointed to "refs/remotes/origin/master"
> (which you can see from his script above doesn't actually get used).
>
> So presumably the old git-fetch didn't care that the contents of
> branch.*.master didn't exist (it's just that nothing got marked for
> merging), but the one just merged from the db/fetch-pack topic does.
>
> Is this behavior change intentional?
It's not exactly intentional; it's just that nobody seems to have tested
this particular misconfiguration. It should probably report an error
(since the configuration is, in fact, broken and potentially misleading),
but it probably shouldn't be fatal and certainly shouldn't be so
uninformative.
I guess it's a new feature that you can use a branch.*.merge line to
select a ref that otherwise wouldn't be fetched at all, cause it to be
fetched, and have it marked for merging; previously, such a config line
would just be ignored, as it didn't exactly match anything. It's a side
effect that something that doesn't exist (by that name on the remote side)
is now an issue.
-Daniel
*This .sig left intentionally blank*
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-10-25 18:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-10-25 14:32 recent change in git.git/master broke my repos Randal L. Schwartz
2007-10-25 15:01 ` Karl Hasselström
2007-10-25 17:46 ` Nicolas Pitre
2007-10-25 18:29 ` Randal L. Schwartz
2007-10-25 20:23 ` Andreas Ericsson
2007-10-25 20:38 ` Nicolas Pitre
2007-10-25 20:42 ` Andreas Ericsson
2007-10-26 7:39 ` Karl Hasselström
2007-10-25 15:51 ` Jeff King
2007-10-25 15:55 ` Randal L. Schwartz
2007-10-25 15:57 ` Jeff King
2007-10-25 15:58 ` Randal L. Schwartz
2007-10-25 16:01 ` Jeff King
2007-10-25 16:06 ` Randal L. Schwartz
2007-10-25 16:56 ` Jeff King
2007-10-25 18:05 ` Daniel Barkalow [this message]
2007-10-27 6:09 ` Junio C Hamano
2007-10-27 20:06 ` Daniel Barkalow
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=Pine.LNX.4.64.0710251351330.7345@iabervon.org \
--to=barkalow@iabervon.org \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=merlyn@stonehenge.com \
--cc=peff@peff.net \
/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).