On Thursday 16 November 2017 03:44 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Kaartic Sivaraam <kaartic.sivar...@gmail.com> writes:
>> Are these two patches follow-up fixes (replacement of 3/3 plus an
>> extra patch) to jc/branch-name-sanity topic?
>
> Yes, that's right.
>
>> Thanks for working on these.
>
> You're welcome. Please do be sure I haven't broken anything in
> v2. These patches should cleanly apply on 'next', if they don't let me
> know.
OK, so here is a replacement for your replacement, based on an
additional analysis I did while I was reviewing your changes.
The final 4/4 is what you sent as [v2 2/2] (which was meant to
be [v2 4/3]). I think with these updates, the resulting 4-patch
series is good for 'next'.
I guess this series is not yet ready for 'next'. When I tried to apply
this patch it doesn't seem to be applying cleanly. I get some conflicts
in 'sha1_name.c' possibly as a consequence of the changes to the file
that aren't accounted by the patch. As to which change,
$ git whatchanged jch/jc/branch-name-sanity..origin/next sha1_name.c
lists at least 5 of them, so there's possibly a lot of change that
hasn't been taken into account by this patch. Particularly, the function
'strbuf_check_branch_ref' itself is found at line 1435 in the version
found in 'next' though this patch expects it to be near line 1332, I guess.
Further comment inline.
sha1_name.c | 14 ++++++++++++--
t/t1430-bad-ref-name.sh | 43 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
2 files changed, 55 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/sha1_name.c b/sha1_name.c
index c7c5ab376c..67961d6e47 100644
--- a/sha1_name.c
+++ b/sha1_name.c
@@ -1332,9 +1332,19 @@ void strbuf_branchname(struct strbuf *sb, const char
*name, unsigned allowed)
int strbuf_check_branch_ref(struct strbuf *sb, const char *name)
{
strbuf_branchname(sb, name, INTERPRET_BRANCH_LOCAL);
- if (name[0] == '-')
- return -1;
+
+ /*
+ * This splice must be done even if we end up rejecting the
+ * name; builtin/branch.c::copy_or_rename_branch() still wants
+ * to see what the name expanded to so that "branch -m" can be
+ * used as a tool to correct earlier mistakes.
+ */
strbuf_splice(sb, 0, 0, "refs/heads/", 11);
+
+ if (*name == '-' ||
+ !strcmp(sb->buf, "refs/heads/HEAD"))
I guess this check should be made more consistent. Possibly either of,
if (starts_with(sb->buf, "refs/heads/-") ||
!strcmp(sb->buf, "refs/heads/HEAD"))
or,
if (*name == '-' ||
!strcmp(name, "HEAD"))
might make them consistent (at least from my perspective).
I tried to reproduce this patch manually and other than the above this
one LGTM. Though I can't be very sure as I couldn't apply it (I did it
"manually" to some extent, you see ;-)
+ return -1;
+
return check_refname_format(sb->buf, 0);
}
diff --git a/t/t1430-bad-ref-name.sh b/t/t1430-bad-ref-name.sh
index e88349c8a0..c7878a60ed 100755
--- a/t/t1430-bad-ref-name.sh
+++ b/t/t1430-bad-ref-name.sh
@@ -331,4 +331,47 @@ test_expect_success 'update-ref --stdin -z fails delete
with bad ref name' '
grep "fatal: invalid ref format: ~a" err
'
+test_expect_success 'branch rejects HEAD as a branch name' '
+ test_must_fail git branch HEAD HEAD^ &&
+ test_must_fail git show-ref refs/heads/HEAD
+'
+
+test_expect_success 'checkout -b rejects HEAD as a branch name' '
+ test_must_fail git checkout -B HEAD HEAD^ &&
+ test_must_fail git show-ref refs/heads/HEAD
+'
+
+test_expect_success 'update-ref can operate on refs/heads/HEAD' '
+ git update-ref refs/heads/HEAD HEAD^ &&
+ git show-ref refs/heads/HEAD &&
+ git update-ref -d refs/heads/HEAD &&
+ test_must_fail git show-ref refs/heads/HEAD
+'
+
+test_expect_success 'branch -d can remove refs/heads/HEAD' '
+ git update-ref refs/heads/HEAD HEAD^ &&
+ git branch -d HEAD &&
+ test_must_fail git show-ref refs/heads/HEAD
+'
+
+test_expect_success 'branch -m can rename refs/heads/HEAD' '
+ git update-ref refs/heads/HEAD HEAD^ &&
+ git branch -m HEAD tail &&
+ test_must_fail git show-ref refs/heads/HEAD &&
+ git show-ref refs/heads/tail
+'
+
+test_expect_success 'branch -d can remove refs/heads/-dash' '
+ git update-ref refs/heads/-dash HEAD^ &&
+ git branch -d -- -dash &&
+ test_must_fail git show-ref refs/heads/-dash
+'
+
+test_expect_success 'branch -m can rename refs/heads/-dash' '
+ git update-ref refs/heads/-dash HEAD^ &&
+ git branch -m -- -dash dash &&
+ test_must_fail git show-ref refs/heads/-dash &&
+ git show-ref refs/heads/dash
+'
+
test_done
