Hi Peff & Thomas,
On Mon, 15 Feb 2016, Jeff King wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 06:42:30PM +0100, Thomas Gummerer wrote:
>
> > Both remote add and remote rename use a slightly different hand-rolled
> > check if the remote exits. The hand-rolled check may have some subtle
> > cases in which it might fail to detect when a remote already exists.
> > One such case was fixed in fb86e32 ("git remote: allow adding remotes
> > agreeing with url.<...>.insteadOf"). Another case is when a remote is
> > configured as follows:
> >
> > [remote "foo"]
> > vcs = bar
> >
> > If we try to run `git remote add foo bar` with the above remote
> > configuration, git segfaults. This change fixes it.
> >
> > In addition, git remote rename $existing foo with the configuration for
> > foo as above silently succeeds, even though foo already exists,
> > modifying its configuration. With this patch it fails with "remote foo
> > already exists".
>
> Checking is_configured() certainly sounds like a better test, but...
>
> > diff --git a/builtin/remote.c b/builtin/remote.c
> > index 981c487..bd57f1b 100644
> > --- a/builtin/remote.c
> > +++ b/builtin/remote.c
> > @@ -186,10 +186,7 @@ static int add(int argc, const char **argv)
> > url = argv[1];
> >
> > remote = remote_get(name);
> > - if (remote && (remote->url_nr > 1 ||
> > - (strcmp(name, remote->url[0]) &&
> > - strcmp(url, remote->url[0])) ||
> > - remote->fetch_refspec_nr))
> > + if (remote_is_configured(remote))
> > die(_("remote %s already exists."), name);
>
> This original is quite confusing. I thought at first that there was
> perhaps something going on with allowing repeated re-configuration of
> the same remote, as long as some parameters matched. I.e., I am
> wondering if there is a case here that does _not_ segfault, that we
> would be breaking.
>
> But reading over fb86e32dcc, I think I have convinced myself that it was
> merely an ad-hoc check for "is_configured", and using that function is a
> better replacement.
Yes, yes, yes. Y'all are absolutely correct. I shoulda added a test case
right away, to make sure not only that what I fixed does not get broken in
the future, but also to document *what* was fixed, exactly.
So, belatedly, here goes a patch that verifies what that commit was
supposed to fix, and yes, it passes with Thomas' changes (Junio, would you
please apply this on top of tg/git-remote?):
-- snipsnap --
From: Johannes Schindelin <[email protected]>
Date: Wed, 17 Feb 2016 14:45:59 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] t5505: 'remote add x y' should work when url.y.insteadOf = x
This is the test missing from fb86e32 (git remote: allow adding
remotes agreeing with url.<...>.insteadOf, 2014-12-23): we should
allow adding a remote with the URL when it agrees with the
url.<...>.insteadOf setting.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <[email protected]>
---
t/t5505-remote.sh | 5 +++++
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
diff --git a/t/t5505-remote.sh b/t/t5505-remote.sh
index 94079a0..19e8e34 100755
--- a/t/t5505-remote.sh
+++ b/t/t5505-remote.sh
@@ -51,6 +51,11 @@ test_expect_success setup '
git clone one test
'
+test_expect_success 'add remote whose URL agrees with url.<...>.insteadOf' '
+ git config [email protected]:team/repo.git.insteadOf myremote &&
+ git remote add myremote [email protected]:team/repo.git
+'
+
test_expect_success C_LOCALE_OUTPUT 'remote information for the origin' '
(
cd test &&
--
2.7.1.windows.2
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
