Re: What's cooking in git.git (Jan 2022, #03; Thu, 13)

[Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>]

On Fri, Jan 14, 2022 at 8:19 AM Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
>
> Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes:
>
> > There are a few "oops, what we merged recently is broken" topics
> > that still are not in 'master', but otherwise what we have should
> > be pretty much what we'll have in the final one.
> >
> >  - I am reasonably happy with ab/refs-errno-cleanup (just one patch)
> >    that fixes the incorrect state of the code left by the earlier
> >    parts of the topic that have already been merged during this
> >    cycle.
> >
> >  - I am also OK with ab/reftable-build-fixes (two patches), one for
> >    general type correctness fix, the other for helping older sub-C99
> >    compilers.
> >
> > If there are fixes for regressions that we introduced during this
> > cycle other than these two topics, I certainly am missing them, so
> > please holler loudly and quickly, hopefully in time for me to tag
> > the -rc1 tomorrow.
>
> Oh, by the way, the tip of 'seen' has consistently failing the
> leak-check test.  I didn't have chance, time or energy to see if
> they are failing merely because an existing test script that used to
> be leak-clean gained a use of command that has been known to be
> leak-unclean without introducing any new leaks, or our recent change
> did introduce new leaks to commands that have been leak-clean.

It's apparently the latter, because there have been no test script
changes in the relevant tests.

> Somebody with too much time on their hand should go in and check to
> help, before CI testing on 'seen' becomes useful again.

This "fixes" seen:
https://lore.kernel.org/git/pull.1192.git.git.1642176433017.gitgitgadget@gmail.com/

I briefly looked at a couple leak traces and thought they looked ref
related, but I don't have time to go hunt down memory leaks right now.
I figure this thread has reported them, so let's just get "seen" back
to green.