Den mån 23 aug. 2021 kl 11:16 skrev Stefan Sperling <s...@elego.de>:
> On Sat, Aug 21, 2021 at 09:38:56PM +0200, Daniel Sahlberg wrote:
> > > @@ -3028,12 +3028,12 @@ conflict_tree_get_details_local_missing(
> > >
> deleted_basename,
> > > conflict->pool);
> > > details->moves = moves;
> > > + details->wc_move_targets = apr_hash_make(conflict->pool);
> > > if (details->moves != NULL)
> > > {
> > > apr_pool_t *iterpool;
> > > int i;
> > >
> > > - details->wc_move_targets = apr_hash_make(conflict->pool);
> > > iterpool = svn_pool_create(scratch_pool);
> > > for (i = 0; i < details->moves->nelts; i++)
> > > {
> > >
> >
> > I have not investigated further (ENOTIME right now) but I presume some
> > other part of the code expects wc_move_targets to be NULL.
>
> The problem is that some parts of the code try to search the now non-NULL
> hash map with a NULL key because they lack checks for NULL keys.
> I will commit a fix shortly.
>
Thanks!
I can confirm that the test suite now passes.
I'm going to upgrade my vote to +0, not because I have any concerns but
because I don't feel confident enough reviewing the C code to vote +1.
Kind regards,
Daniel Sahlberg
