Christian Couder <christian.couder@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > Actually strvec_push() uses xstrdup() on the value it is passed and > xstrdup() crashes if that value is NULL. So another way to avoid > crashes would be to make xstrdup() BUG when it's passed NULL. Or maybe > xstrdup() should just return NULL in this case? > > Also it looks like strvec_push_nodup() kind of works if it is passed a > NULL. (It adds the NULL to the array and grows it.) So I wonder if the > right solution for strvec_push() would be to make it kind of work in > the same way. Meaning "xstrdup" -> "xstrdup_or_null"? It actually may be a reasonable thing to do, to remain parallel to the _nodup() variant, but given strvec is about making it easier to do argc/argv[], allowing NULL in it does not sound like it is in line with its stated purpose. I also do not think checking inside xstrdup() is a good idea; it is at way too low a level. > Anyway I think these are separate issues that deserve their own > discussions and can wait for after the 2.49.0 release. Absolutely. > Here I am just > providing a hotfix for the "promisor-remote" protocol capability. Ooof, I didn't realize that cc/lop-remote escaped 'seen' with such a bug X-<. Thanks.
