"Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > Jeff King reported that Coverity pointed out a problem in the patch series > "The merge-base logic vs missing commit objects" (which made it into the > next branch already): The return value of merge_submodules() is assigned to > an unsigned, single-bit variable, which as a consequence is not able to hold > a negative value indicating a non-recoverable error. > > I looked into this issue and am happy to report that there are no other > instances of the same issue in that patch series. The first patch in this > here patch series addresses that issue. > > While looking into this issue I also noticed that the merge_submodule() > function did not even return negative values! This was an oversight on my > part (which I attribute with a large amount of self-compassion to my utter > lack of enthusiasm for submodules as a Git feature), and the second patch in > this here patch series addresses that. > > This is a follow-up for > https://lore.kernel.org/git/pull.1657.v4.git.1709113457.gitgitgadget@xxxxxxxxx/, > based on the js/merge-base-with-missing-commit branch. Thanks. > > Johannes Schindelin (2): > merge-recursive: prepare for `merge_submodule()` to report errors > merge-ort/merge-recursive: do report errors in `merge_submodule()` > > merge-ort.c | 5 +++++ > merge-recursive.c | 21 +++++++++++++++------ > 2 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) > > > base-commit: caaf1a2942c25c1f1a15818b718c9f641e52beef > Published-As: https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git/releases/tag/pr-1686%2Fdscho%2Fmerge-base-and-missing-objects-followup-v1 > Fetch-It-Via: git fetch https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git pr-1686/dscho/merge-base-and-missing-objects-followup-v1 > Pull-Request: https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git/pull/1686
