We have two error messages that complain about the "sha1". Because we
are about to touch one of these sites and add some tests, let's first
modernize the messages to say "object ID" instead.
While at it, make the second one use `error()` instead of `warning()`.
After printing the message, we do not continue, but actually drop the
lock and return -1 without deleting the pseudoref.
Signed-off-by: Martin Ågren <martin.agren@xxxxxxxxx>
---
We could make error-reporting more consistent in general in this file,
but I'd rather not lose track of the original goal of this series.
refs.c | 6 ++++--
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/refs.c b/refs.c
index 64aadd14c9..7820a52c4f 100644
--- a/refs.c
+++ b/refs.c
@@ -684,7 +684,8 @@ static int write_pseudoref(const char *pseudoref, const struct object_id *oid,
if (read_ref(pseudoref, &actual_old_oid))
die("could not read ref '%s'", pseudoref);
if (oidcmp(&actual_old_oid, old_oid)) {
- strbuf_addf(err, "unexpected sha1 when writing '%s'", pseudoref);
+ strbuf_addf(err, "unexpected object ID when writing '%s'",
+ pseudoref);
rollback_lock_file(&lock);
goto done;
}
@@ -722,7 +723,8 @@ static int delete_pseudoref(const char *pseudoref, const struct object_id *old_o
if (read_ref(pseudoref, &actual_old_oid))
die("could not read ref '%s'", pseudoref);
if (oidcmp(&actual_old_oid, old_oid)) {
- warning("Unexpected sha1 when deleting %s", pseudoref);
+ error("unexpected object ID when deleting '%s'",
+ pseudoref);
rollback_lock_file(&lock);
return -1;
}
--
2.17.0
