On Tue, May 09, 2023 at 05:14:49PM +0200, Patrick Steinhardt wrote: > On Mon, May 08, 2023 at 05:59:52PM -0400, Taylor Blau wrote: > > From: Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> > > > > We did not bother to clean up at all in branch/tag, and for-each-ref > > only hit a few elements. So this is probably cleaning up leaks, but I > > didn't check yet. > > Nit: it sounds like there still is the intent to check whether this does > fix leaks. How about updating the commit message to either not mention > the intent or perform the check? Oops. Thanks for the reminder. Peff sent this patch to me while we were working on this topic together, and I forgot to come back and actually perform this check. Luckily, it helps out quite a bit: t/t0041-usage.sh | 1 + t/t2016-checkout-patch.sh | 1 + t/t3402-rebase-merge.sh | 1 + t/t3407-rebase-abort.sh | 1 + t/t4058-diff-duplicates.sh | 2 ++ t/t5407-post-rewrite-hook.sh | 1 + t/t5811-proto-disable-git.sh | 2 ++ t/t6001-rev-list-graft.sh | 1 + t/t7008-filter-branch-null-sha1.sh | 1 + t/t7408-submodule-reference.sh | 2 ++ t/t9502-gitweb-standalone-parse-output.sh | 1 + 11 new leak-free tests! I'll take it ;-). Thanks, Taylor
