On 04/30/2017 07:29 PM, brian m. carlson wrote:
@@ -391,10 +391,8 @@ static void write_branch_report(FILE *rpt, struct branch
*b)
fputc('\n', rpt);
fprintf(rpt, " tip commit : %s\n", oid_to_hex(&b->oid));
- fprintf(rpt, " old tree : %s\n",
- oid_to_hex(&b->branch_tree.versions[0].oid));
- fprintf(rpt, " cur tree : %s\n",
- oid_to_hex(&b->branch_tree.versions[1].oid));
+ fprintf(rpt, " old tree : %s\n",
oid_to_hex(&b->branch_tree.versions[0].oid));
+ fprintf(rpt, " cur tree : %s\n",
oid_to_hex(&b->branch_tree.versions[1].oid));
fprintf(rpt, " commit clock: %" PRIuMAX "\n", b->last_commit);
fputs(" last pack : ", rpt);
These look like unnecessary line rewrappings.
@@ -2298,8 +2296,12 @@ static uintmax_t do_change_note_fanout(
static uintmax_t change_note_fanout(struct tree_entry *root,
unsigned char fanout)
{
- char hex_sha1[40], path[60];
- return do_change_note_fanout(root, root, hex_sha1, 0, path, 0, fanout);
+ /*
+ * The size of path is due to one slash between every two hex digits,
+ * plus the terminating NUL.
+ */
+ char hex_oid[GIT_MAX_HEXSZ], path[GIT_MAX_HEXSZ * 3 / 2];
If your comment is correct, shouldn't the size of path be 61 (that is,
add "+ 1")? I took a look at do_change_note_fanout() and your comment
seems correct.
+ return do_change_note_fanout(root, root, hex_oid, 0, path, 0, fanout);
}
/*
Other than these, patches 10 and 11 look fine.
