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
>
next prev parent 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).