On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 12:12 PM, Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> (+cc: peff for STORE_REF_ERROR_DF_CONFLICT expertise)
> Ronnie Sahlberg wrote:
>
>> --- a/builtin/fetch.c
>> +++ b/builtin/fetch.c
>> @@ -375,7 +375,7 @@ static int s_update_ref(const char *action,
> [...]
>> + transaction = ref_transaction_begin();
>> + if (!transaction ||
>> + ref_transaction_update(transaction, ref->name, ref->new_sha1,
>> + ref->old_sha1, 0, check_old) ||
>> + ref_transaction_commit(transaction, msg, NULL)) {
>> + ref_transaction_rollback(transaction);
>> return errno == ENOTDIR ? STORE_REF_ERROR_DF_CONFLICT :
>> STORE_REF_ERROR_OTHER;
>> + }
>
> I'd rather not rely on errno here (see the previous patch for why).
> Is there some other way to distinguish the case where a ref couldn't
> be created because there was a prefix of that ref in the way?
>
> For example, maybe ref_transaction_commit could return a different
> negative integer in this case.
I have changed it to make transaction_commit will return a special
error if there is a name conflict
and fetch.c now uses that instead of looking at errno to decide if to
print the "try pruning" message.
>
> Thanks,
> Jonathan
--
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