Taylor Blau <me@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> I'll write up the details and post the patch shortly, but an easy fix
> is:
Ah, I am glad that you beat me ;-)
> --- 8< ---
>
> diff --git a/fmt-merge-msg.c b/fmt-merge-msg.c
> index e5c0aff2bf..baca57d5b6 100644
> --- a/fmt-merge-msg.c
> +++ b/fmt-merge-msg.c
> @@ -541,7 +541,6 @@ static void fmt_merge_msg_sigs(struct strbuf *out)
> else
> strbuf_addstr(&sig, sigc.output);
> }
> - signature_check_clear(&sigc);
>
> if (!tag_number++) {
> fmt_tag_signature(&tagbuf, &sig, buf, len);
> @@ -565,6 +564,7 @@ static void fmt_merge_msg_sigs(struct strbuf *out)
> }
> strbuf_release(&payload);
> strbuf_release(&sig);
> + signature_check_clear(&sigc);
> next:
> free(origbuf);
> }
>
> --- >8 ---
>
> Our coverage in t6200 (which should have ordinarily caught such a bug)
> is lacking and does not search for the tag message in fmt-merge-msg's
> output.
True.
Thanks, both.
