On Thu, Jan 13 2022, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
>> There are a few "oops, what we merged recently is broken" topics
>> that still are not in 'master', but otherwise what we have should
>> be pretty much what we'll have in the final one.
>>
>> - I am reasonably happy with ab/refs-errno-cleanup (just one patch)
>> that fixes the incorrect state of the code left by the earlier
>> parts of the topic that have already been merged during this
>> cycle.
>>
>> - I am also OK with ab/reftable-build-fixes (two patches), one for
>> general type correctness fix, the other for helping older sub-C99
>> compilers.
>>
>> If there are fixes for regressions that we introduced during this
>> cycle other than these two topics, I certainly am missing them, so
>> please holler loudly and quickly, hopefully in time for me to tag
>> the -rc1 tomorrow.
>
> Oh, by the way, the tip of 'seen' has consistently failing the
> leak-check test. I didn't have chance, time or energy to see if
> they are failing merely because an existing test script that used to
> be leak-clean gained a use of command that has been known to be
> leak-unclean without introducing any new leaks, or our recent change
> did introduce new leaks to commands that have been leak-clean.
> Somebody with too much time on their hand should go in and check to
> help, before CI testing on 'seen' becomes useful again.
It's a regression in
ps/avoid-unnecessary-hook-invocation-with-packed-refs, Patrick could you
look into it? On your current "seen" doing a:
git revert -m 1 48b388cbf31
Will make those 3x failing tests pass:
https://github.com/git/git/runs/4811683950?check_suite_focus=true
(That commit being: 48b388cbf31 (Merge branch
'ps/avoid-unnecessary-hook-invocation-with-packed-refs' into seen,
2022-01-13))
I didn't have much time to look now, but this mostly untested fix-up
fixes up the topic under SANITIZE=leak (but may break something else). I
ran the broken tests with SANITIZE=leak, and the normal tests without
SANITIZE=leak, but didn't have time for further testing:
diff --git a/refs/packed-backend.c b/refs/packed-backend.c
index ff96ee482a0..b8012f97009 100644
--- a/refs/packed-backend.c
+++ b/refs/packed-backend.c
@@ -1577,6 +1577,7 @@ int packed_refs_delete_refs(struct ref_store *ref_store,
error(_("could not delete references: %s"), err.buf);
}
+ ref_transaction_free(transaction);
strbuf_release(&err);
return ret;
}
I.e. the moving around of the ref_transaction_free() is at fault
somehow, probably...
Junio: Is there something you're doing to hide
https://github.com/gitster/git/actions ? My version of that is visible
without being logged-in, but yours is a 404 (maybe it needs to be set
up?)
If CI is setup to run on your topic push-outs it'll become easier both
for you & others to see what topics in "seen" may be broken. Usually it
would be a matter of browsing the page of pushed-out topics for failures
(except in cases where the merger causes the faulure...)
