On Tue, Oct 02, 2007 at 01:50:28PM +0100, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, 2 Oct 2007, Andy Whitcroft wrote:
>
> > @@ -137,5 +144,10 @@ int cmd_push(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix)
> > if (all && refspec)
> > usage(push_usage);
> >
> > + if (modes_specified > 1) {
> > + error("--all and --mirror are incompatible");
> > + usage(push_usage);
> > + }
> > +
>
> Why not
>
> if ((flags & TRANSPORT_PUSH_ALL) && (flags & TRANSPORT_PUSH_MIRROR))?
>
> It's more explicit.
Yep, that does seem cleaner.
> > @@ -667,6 +673,8 @@ static int git_transport_push(struct transport *transport, int refspec_nr, const
> > argv[argc++] = "--all";
> > if (flags & TRANSPORT_PUSH_FORCE)
> > argv[argc++] = "--force";
> > + if (flags & TRANSPORT_PUSH_MIRROR)
> > + argv[argc++] = "--mirror";
> > if (data->receivepack) {
> > char *rp = xmalloc(strlen(data->receivepack) + 16);
> > sprintf(rp, "--receive-pack=%s", data->receivepack);
>
> Shouldn't you then increment the "11" a few lines before that, to ensure
> enough space for the new argument?
I should have mentioned I'd not even reviewed it as the basic underlying
functionality seemed to be broken. I'll look over it if I get a chance
to try and debug the underlying failure.
-apw
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
