On Mon, Jan 06, 2014 at 08:16:31AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > I was going to ask you to send your repository, but I can easily > > reproduce here. I guess people don't run into it because it's uncommon > > to fetch the whole refs/ namespace from a non-bare repo (and bare repos > > do not tend to have stashes). Here's a minimal reproduction recipe: > > > > git init repo && > > cd repo && > > echo content >foo && > > git add . && > > git commit -m foo && > > echo more >>foo && > > git stash && > > git init --bare sub && > > cd sub && > > git fetch .. 'refs/*:refs/*' > > > > It looks like we are not feeding refs/stash properly to pack-objects. > > I'll try to take a closer look later today. > > I looked at this in the past and I vaguely recall that we reject it > in the for-each-ref loop with check-ref-format saying "eh, that is a > single-level name". > > At that point I stopped digging, thinking it was a feature ;-) > based on your exact observation about stash vs bare/non-bare.
I am fine with rejecting it with a warning, but we should not then complain that the other side did not send us the object, since we should not be asking for it at all. I also do not see us complaining about the funny ref anywhere. So there is definitely _a_ bug here. :) I think somebody else mentioned recently that we do not handle malformed refs consistently. I think it was: http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/239381 which might or might not be related. -Peff -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
