On Mon, Oct 05, 2009 at 12:08:38PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes: > > > So I think we need something like this. I wasn't able to figure out a > > test case to trigger the first code path below, though. It may not be > > possible; if we give a refspec on the command line, either it will be a > > candidate for merging or, if it does not exist, fetch will barf. So it > > may be that we can just collapse it down to a single case. > > I think you are right. Nope, I'm not. I figured out one more case that it needs to handle. Revised patch coming up in a few minutes. > By the way, I think the other case arms in the case statement that has the > sole caller of this function are never reached, no? > > Back when you added the check in a74b170 (git-pull: disallow implicit > merging to detached HEAD, 2007-01-15), $? referred to the error status of > reading HEAD as a symbolic-ref so the check did make sense, but cd67e4d > (Teach 'git pull' about --rebase, 2007-11-28) made a stupid mistake that > nobody noticed. Hmm. I'm not sure. I don't see how $? could not be zero, though, because the last thing we run is a subshell with sed and tr. But beyond that, we actually handle the detached case in error_on_no_merge_candidates already. So I think that case statement can simply be collapsed to the first case. -Peff -- To unsubscribe from this list: 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