Hello
Earlier, I sent you an email on git@vger.kernel.org please confirm if you got
my message?
Angy Omari
Private Phone+447031903929
omaria...@yandex.com
Jeff King p...@peff.net writes:
...
And there we stop. We don't pass the refs list out of that function
(which, as an aside, is probably a leak). Instead, we depend on the list
of heads we already knew in the to_fetch array. That comes from
processing the earlier list of refs returned from
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 10:41:50AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Just to make sure we do not keep this hanging forever and eventually
forget it, I'm planning to queue this.
Thanks for following up. A few minor nits (and maybe a more serious
problem) on the explanation in the commit message:
Jeff King p...@peff.net writes:
- The only caller of everything_local(), do_fetch_pack(), returns
this list of ref, whose element has bogus new_sha1 values, to its
caller. It does not look at the elements and acts on them.
I'm not sure what the final sentence means. Should it be It
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 12:01:26PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
I'm working up a few patches in that area, which I'll send out in a few
minutes. Once that is done, then I think the explanation you give above
would be correct.
If a follow-up is coming then I'd just drop this one. Thanks.
Hi guys,
So I was looking at fetch-pack.c (from master @ 52cae643, but I think
it's the same everywhere):
# Lines 626-648
for (retval = 1, ref = *refs; ref ; ref = ref-next) {
const unsigned char *remote = ref-old_sha1;
unsigned char local[20];
Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com writes:
Kyle J. McKay mack...@gmail.com writes:
Hi guys,
So I was looking at fetch-pack.c (from master @ 52cae643, but I think
it's the same everywhere):
...
-hashcpy(ref-new_sha1, local);
+hashcpy(ref-new_sha1, o-sha1);
Kyle J. McKay mack...@gmail.com writes:
Hi guys,
So I was looking at fetch-pack.c (from master @ 52cae643, but I think
it's the same everywhere):
# Lines 626-648
49bb805e (Do not ask for objects known to be complete., 2005-10-19)
seems to lose the assignment to local[].
Something's
On Sat, Mar 14, 2015 at 11:37:37PM -0700, Kyle J. McKay wrote:
Peff, weren't you having some issue with want and have and hide refs?
Yes, but the problem was on the server side. I didn't look at this code
at all. :)
Tell me please how the local variable above gets initialized?
So I think we
thing I wonder is if this hashcpy() is doing anything useful,
though. Is ref-new_sha1 used after we are done in this codepath,
or is the reason nobody noticed it is because it does not matter
whatever garbage is in that field nobody looks at it?
My thoughts exactly. hence the please confirm request
Greetings to you,
I want you to assist me in transferring the sum of US$9.5M left behind by my
dead client. I am willing to offer 50% to you as the sole beneficiary after the
funds has been transferred to you.
Get back to me if you are interested so that i can provide you with more details
Greetings to you,
I am Jack Kofi, esq. I want to solicit your consideration to receive some funds
(US$9.5M) on my behalf.
Get back to me if you are interested so that i can provide you with more
details.
Yours Sincerely,
Jack Kofi
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe
12 matches
Mail list logo
