git@vger.kernel.org mailing list mirror (one of many)
 help / color / mirror / code / Atom feed
From: Kaartic Sivaraam <kaartic.sivaraam@gmail.com>
To: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] branch: correctly reject refs/heads/{-dash,HEAD}
Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2017 18:41:10 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <471c7b6e-d3a0-4aee-8f80-282ff0b8d972@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <xmqqpo8jyyti.fsf_-_@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>

On Thursday 16 November 2017 03:44 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>      Kaartic Sivaraam <kaartic.sivaraam@gmail.com> writes:
> 
>      >> Are these two patches follow-up fixes (replacement of 3/3 plus an
>      >> extra patch) to jc/branch-name-sanity topic?
>      >
>      > Yes, that's right.
>      >
>      >> Thanks for working on these.
>      >
>      > You're welcome. Please do be sure I haven't broken anything in
>      > v2. These patches should cleanly apply on 'next', if they don't let me
>      > know.
> 
>      OK, so here is a replacement for your replacement, based on an
>      additional analysis I did while I was reviewing your changes.
>      The final 4/4 is what you sent as [v2 2/2] (which was meant to
>      be [v2 4/3]).  I think with these updates, the resulting 4-patch
>      series is good for 'next'.
> 

I guess this series is not yet ready for 'next'. When I tried to apply 
this patch it doesn't seem to be applying cleanly. I get some conflicts 
in 'sha1_name.c' possibly as a consequence of the changes to the file 
that aren't accounted by the patch. As to which change,

$ git whatchanged  jch/jc/branch-name-sanity..origin/next sha1_name.c

lists at least 5 of them, so there's possibly a lot of change that 
hasn't been taken into account by this patch. Particularly, the function 
'strbuf_check_branch_ref' itself is found at line 1435 in the version 
found in 'next' though this patch expects it to be near line 1332, I guess.

Further comment inline.

>   sha1_name.c             | 14 ++++++++++++--
>   t/t1430-bad-ref-name.sh | 43 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>   2 files changed, 55 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/sha1_name.c b/sha1_name.c
> index c7c5ab376c..67961d6e47 100644
> --- a/sha1_name.c
> +++ b/sha1_name.c
> @@ -1332,9 +1332,19 @@ void strbuf_branchname(struct strbuf *sb, const char *name, unsigned allowed)
>   int strbuf_check_branch_ref(struct strbuf *sb, const char *name)
>   {
>   	strbuf_branchname(sb, name, INTERPRET_BRANCH_LOCAL);
> -	if (name[0] == '-')
> -		return -1;
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * This splice must be done even if we end up rejecting the
> +	 * name; builtin/branch.c::copy_or_rename_branch() still wants
> +	 * to see what the name expanded to so that "branch -m" can be
> +	 * used as a tool to correct earlier mistakes.
> +	 */
>   	strbuf_splice(sb, 0, 0, "refs/heads/", 11);
> +
> +	if (*name == '-' ||
> +	    !strcmp(sb->buf, "refs/heads/HEAD"))

I guess this check should be made more consistent. Possibly either of,

	if (starts_with(sb->buf, "refs/heads/-") ||
	    !strcmp(sb->buf, "refs/heads/HEAD"))

or,

	if (*name == '-' ||
	    !strcmp(name, "HEAD"))


might make them consistent (at least from my perspective).


I tried to reproduce this patch manually and other than the above this 
one LGTM. Though I can't be very sure as I couldn't apply it (I did it 
"manually" to some extent, you see ;-)


> +		return -1;
> +
>   	return check_refname_format(sb->buf, 0);
>   }
>   
> diff --git a/t/t1430-bad-ref-name.sh b/t/t1430-bad-ref-name.sh
> index e88349c8a0..c7878a60ed 100755
> --- a/t/t1430-bad-ref-name.sh
> +++ b/t/t1430-bad-ref-name.sh
> @@ -331,4 +331,47 @@ test_expect_success 'update-ref --stdin -z fails delete with bad ref name' '
>   	grep "fatal: invalid ref format: ~a" err
>   '
>   
> +test_expect_success 'branch rejects HEAD as a branch name' '
> +	test_must_fail git branch HEAD HEAD^ &&
> +	test_must_fail git show-ref refs/heads/HEAD
> +'
> +
> +test_expect_success 'checkout -b rejects HEAD as a branch name' '
> +	test_must_fail git checkout -B HEAD HEAD^ &&
> +	test_must_fail git show-ref refs/heads/HEAD
> +'
> +
> +test_expect_success 'update-ref can operate on refs/heads/HEAD' '
> +	git update-ref refs/heads/HEAD HEAD^ &&
> +	git show-ref refs/heads/HEAD &&
> +	git update-ref -d refs/heads/HEAD &&
> +	test_must_fail git show-ref refs/heads/HEAD
> +'
> +
> +test_expect_success 'branch -d can remove refs/heads/HEAD' '
> +	git update-ref refs/heads/HEAD HEAD^ &&
> +	git branch -d HEAD &&
> +	test_must_fail git show-ref refs/heads/HEAD
> +'
> +
> +test_expect_success 'branch -m can rename refs/heads/HEAD' '
> +	git update-ref refs/heads/HEAD HEAD^ &&
> +	git branch -m HEAD tail &&
> +	test_must_fail git show-ref refs/heads/HEAD &&
> +	git show-ref refs/heads/tail
> +'
> +
> +test_expect_success 'branch -d can remove refs/heads/-dash' '
> +	git update-ref refs/heads/-dash HEAD^ &&
> +	git branch -d -- -dash &&
> +	test_must_fail git show-ref refs/heads/-dash
> +'
> +
> +test_expect_success 'branch -m can rename refs/heads/-dash' '
> +	git update-ref refs/heads/-dash HEAD^ &&
> +	git branch -m -- -dash dash &&
> +	test_must_fail git show-ref refs/heads/-dash &&
> +	git show-ref refs/heads/dash
> +'
> +
>   test_done
> 


  reply	other threads:[~2017-11-16 13:11 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-10-13  5:11 [PATCH 0/3] a small branch API clean-up Junio C Hamano
2017-10-13  5:11 ` [PATCH 1/3] branch: streamline "attr_only" handling in validate_new_branchname() Junio C Hamano
2017-10-13  7:05   ` Eric Sunshine
2017-10-13  5:11 ` [PATCH 2/3] branch: split validate_new_branchname() into two Junio C Hamano
2017-10-21  4:58   ` Kaartic Sivaraam
2017-10-21  9:01     ` Junio C Hamano
2017-10-13  5:11 ` [PATCH 3/3] branch: forbid refs/heads/HEAD Junio C Hamano
2017-10-13 13:15   ` Jeff King
2017-10-14  2:11     ` Junio C Hamano
2017-10-14  2:20       ` Junio C Hamano
2017-10-16 21:38         ` Jeff King
2017-10-21  4:50         ` Kaartic Sivaraam
2017-10-21  8:57           ` Junio C Hamano
2017-10-22  5:00             ` Kaartic Sivaraam
2017-10-21  3:07 ` [PATCH 0/3] a small branch API clean-up Kaartic Sivaraam
2017-10-21  8:52   ` Junio C Hamano
2017-10-22  4:36     ` Kaartic Sivaraam
2017-11-14 11:42 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] branch: forbid refs/heads/HEAD Kaartic Sivaraam
2017-11-14 11:42   ` [PATCH v2 2/2] builtin/branch: remove redundant check for HEAD Kaartic Sivaraam
2017-11-14 12:00   ` [PATCH v2 1/2] branch: forbid refs/heads/HEAD Kaartic Sivaraam
2017-11-14 15:08     ` Junio C Hamano
2017-11-15 16:59       ` Kaartic Sivaraam
2017-11-15 22:14         ` [PATCH 3/4] branch: correctly reject refs/heads/{-dash,HEAD} Junio C Hamano
2017-11-16 13:11           ` Kaartic Sivaraam [this message]
2017-11-16 14:57             ` Junio C Hamano
2017-11-16 17:02               ` Kaartic Sivaraam

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

  List information: http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=471c7b6e-d3a0-4aee-8f80-282ff0b8d972@gmail.com \
    --to=kaartic.sivaraam@gmail.com \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=gitster@pobox.com \
    --cc=peff@peff.net \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox

	https://80x24.org/mirrors/git.git

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).