On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 4:22 PM, Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Ronnie Sahlberg wrote:
>
>> --- a/refs.c
>> +++ b/refs.c
> [...]
>> @@ -2515,24 +2510,18 @@ static int delete_ref_loose(struct ref_lock *lock, int flag, struct strbuf *err)
>>
>> int delete_ref(const char *refname, const unsigned char *sha1, int delopt)
>> {
>> - struct ref_lock *lock;
>> - int ret = 0, flag = 0;
>> + struct ref_transaction *transaction;
>>
> [...]
>> - lock = lock_ref_sha1_basic(refname, sha1, delopt, &flag);
>> + if (!transaction ||
>> + ref_transaction_delete(transaction, refname, sha1, delopt,
>> + sha1 && !is_null_sha1(sha1), &err) ||
>
> What should happen when is_null_sha1(sha1)? In that case the
> caller has asked us to check that the ref doesn't exist before
> deleting it, which doesn't make a lot of sense, but the old
> code did exactly that if I read it correctly. The new code
> seems to disable verification instead.
>
> Do we know that no callers call delete_ref with such an argument?
> Would it make sense to just die with a "BUG:" message to make
> the contract more clear?
There are no callers that pass in null_sha1 explicitely and all tests pass.
I have changed it to a die("BUG... to make it more explicit as you suggested.
>
> [...]
>> - unlink_or_warn(git_path("logs/%s", lock->ref_name));
>
> When does the reflog get deleted in the new code?
It is deleted towards the end of ref_transaction_commit, after the ref
itself has been deleted.
Thanks!
ronnie sahlberg
--
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