This was triggered by me testing the "@@" numbering shorthand by GNU
patch, which not only showed that git-apply thought it meant the number
was duplicated (when it means that the second number is 1), but my tests
showed than when git-apply mis-understood the number, it would then not
raise an alarm about it if the patch ended early.
Now, this doesn't actually _matter_, since with a three-line context, the
only case that "x,1" will be shorthanded to "x" is when x itself is 1 (in
which case git-apply got it right), but the fact that git-apply would also
silently accept truncated patches was a missed opportunity for additional
sanity-checking.
So make git-apply refuse to look at a patch fragment that ends early.
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxx>
----
If you already applied the first hunk, just ignore that part, and apply
the second one that adds the test for oldlines/newlines being zero after
the patch.
Neither of these two changes should matter for a well-formed patch, but
it's definitely the right thing to do.
diff --git a/apply.c b/apply.c
index 2da225a..c50b3a6 100644
--- a/apply.c
+++ b/apply.c
@@ -693,7 +693,7 @@ static int parse_range(const char *line,
line += digits;
len -= digits;
- *p2 = *p1;
+ *p2 = 1;
if (*line == ',') {
digits = parse_num(line+1, p2);
if (!digits)
@@ -901,6 +901,8 @@ static int parse_fragment(char *line, un
break;
}
}
+ if (oldlines || newlines)
+ return -1;
/* If a fragment ends with an incomplete line, we failed to include
* it in the above loop because we hit oldlines == newlines == 0
* before seeing it.
-
: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html