Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes:
> I noticed the HEAD funniness, too, when looking at this earlier. I agree
> with Junio that it's not quite consistent with the general rule of
> "string list items point to their refnames", but I don't think it
> matters in practice.
Yup, we are on the same page; the "fix" I was alluding to would look
exactly like what you wrote below, but I agree the distinction does
not matter in practice. IOW, I do not think the code after Martin's
fix is wrong per-se.
Thanks.
> I think the fix, if we wanted to do one, would be similar to what you
> did in split_symref_update(). Like:
>
> diff --git a/refs/files-backend.c b/refs/files-backend.c
> index f3455609d6..3f9deff902 100644
> --- a/refs/files-backend.c
> +++ b/refs/files-backend.c
> @@ -2095,8 +2095,7 @@ static int split_head_update(struct ref_update *update,
> * transaction. This insertion is O(N) in the transaction
> * size, but it happens at most once per transaction.
> */
> - item = string_list_insert(affected_refnames, "HEAD");
> - if (item->util) {
> + if (string_list_has_string(affected_refnames, "HEAD")) {
> /* An entry already existed */
> strbuf_addf(err,
> "multiple updates for 'HEAD' (including one "
> @@ -2111,6 +2110,7 @@ static int split_head_update(struct ref_update *update,
> update->new_oid.hash, update->old_oid.hash,
> update->msg);
>
> + item = string_list_insert(affected_refnames, new_update->refname);
> item->util = new_update;
>
> return 0;
>
> -Peff
