René Scharfe <rene.scharfe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> which shows some parts of unpack-trees.c that I use as context to
> ask: Should we check for o->merge in line 775, before using src[0]?
>
> If o->merge is 0, the src[0] will be NULL right up to the call of
> unpack_nondirectories() in line 772. There it may be set (in line
> 582). In that case we'll end up at line 779, where mark_ce_used()
> is applied to it.
>
> I suspect that this is unintended and that line 775 should rather
> read "if (o->merge && src[0]) {". Can someone with a better
> understanding of unpack-trees confirm or refute that suspicion?
Yeah, src[0] is meant to hold the entry from the current index to take it
as well as our tree into account during o->merge, and I do not think it
should affect when we are only reading tree(s) into the index.
I think da165f4 (unpack-trees.c: prepare for looking ahead in the index,
2010-01-07) simply forgot that the codepath also has to work when it is
not merging.
Having said that, I do not know offhand if we just should nothing in
no-merge case, or we should be doing something else instead, without
thinking a bit more.
--
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