Ronnie Sahlberg wrote:
> --- a/refs.c
> +++ b/refs.c
> @@ -2044,6 +2044,9 @@ static struct ref_lock *lock_ref_sha1_basic(const char *refname,
> int missing = 0;
> int attempts_remaining = 3;
>
> + if (check_refname_format(refname, REFNAME_ALLOW_ONELEVEL))
> + return NULL;
Are we sure that no callers are locking a poorly named ref
as preparation for repairing it?
To see what works already in that vein, I tried:
$ git rev-parse HEAD >.git/refs/heads/foo..bar
$ git branch -m foo..bar something-saner
fatal: Invalid branch name: 'foo..bar'
"git branch -m" has an explicit codepath ("recovery = 1;") to handle
this case, but it looks like it was not well tested and regressed in
v1.7.8-rc0~19^2~7 (resolve_ref(): verify that the input refname has
the right format, 2011-09-15).
Is what the recovery codepath of branch -m does misguided? One
school of thought would be that people with malformed refs are
responsible for recovering using low-level tools like "mv" and "vi"
instead of normal git commands since normal git commands should never
have created such a bad situation. Another school of thought would
assert that
* git commands can have bugs
* the format checked by check_refname_format() keeps getting stricter
over time
which means it's nice when people can recover with 'update-ref -d'
or 'branch -m'. It's not obvious to me what the right thing to do
here is (maybe a special flag to be attached to a ref update during
recovery?).
Hope that helps,
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