On Dec 5, 2007 7:06 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Daniel Barkalow <barkalow@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
> > On Tue, 4 Dec 2007, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> >
> >> The code calls fetch_pack() to get the list of refs it fetched, and
> >> discards refs and always returns 0 to signal success.
> >>
> >> But builtin-fetch-pack.c::fetch_pack() has error cases. The function
> >> returns NULL if error is detected (shallow-support side seems to choose
> >> to die but I suspect that is easily fixable to error out as well).
> >>
> >> Shouldn't fetch_refs_via_pack() propagate that error to the caller?
> >
> > I think that's right. I think I got as far as having the error status from
> > fetch_pack() actually returned correctly, and then failed to look at it.
> > I'd personally avoid testing a pointer to freed memory, but that's
> > obviously not actually wrong.
> >
> > -Daniel
>
> Hmph, is that an Ack that the patchlet is actually a bugfix?
>
Hi, Mr. Junio!
My 2 cents: I think he means that we should not test a freed pointer:
free_refs(refs);
free(dest); <===
- return 0;
+ return (refs ? 0 : -1); <===
Best regards,
--
[]s,
André Goddard
-
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
