Glen Choo <chooglen@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> Glen Choo <chooglen@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
>>> The caller is remote_get_1(); this funciton was called with
>>> "current_branch", which can be NULL until you have a repository and
>>> you've called read_config(), but otherwise shouldn't be.
>
> One possible culprit is working with detached HEAD, are you pushing with
> detached HEAD?
>
> "current_branch" is allowed to be NULL when HEAD does not point to a
> branch.
Good point. It is a good justification to make the remote_state
available to the function, as branch==NULL that signals "there is no
current branch in the repository" cannot be dereferenced to get to
either the repository or the remote_state, yet the function needs
access to remote_state even when branch==NULL.
What "branch" is pushremote_for_branch() meant to take? Is there a
caller that asks a hypothetical "I know this is not a branch that is
the current branch in the repository, but to which remote would we
push if this branch _were_ the current one?" (and passes NULL to
mean "there is a checked out branch, but what happens if our HEAD
were detached?") question? Even if there isn't currently, do we
want to add such callers in the future?
If the answer is yes, then the function need to take both branch and
remote_state as two separate parameters. If the answer is no (i.e.
we never ask hypothetical questions, we just ask what we should do
in the current, real, state), then the function can just take the
remote_state and remote_state->branch being NULL would be used as a
signal that the HEAD is detached. I suspect it is the former, as
this information is used in string-name-to-object translation for
"topic@{push}" in object-name.c::interpret_branch_mark() function.
> However, if you are not using detached HEAD, the problem might be
> elsewhere..
I just checked. The repository the push is run in is bare and its
HEAD is detached, pointing at a commit directly.
