Re: Possible regression in ref advertisement

2013-02-26 Thread Junio C Hamano
Carlos Martín Nieto writes: > Since the libgit2 parser seems to work with it, it's perfectly possible > I did mess about with the file and then promptly forgot. An error would > definitely not help here, but I do think a warning should be issued if > the file isn't quite as it should be. It seems

Re: Possible regression in ref advertisement

2013-02-26 Thread Carlos Martín Nieto
On Mon, 2013-02-25 at 13:16 -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Carlos Martín Nieto writes: > > >> As packed-refs file is expected to be a text file, it is not > >> surprising to get an undefined result if the it ends with an > >> incomplete line. > > > > I guess that depends on what you mean by incom

Re: Possible regression in ref advertisement

2013-02-25 Thread Junio C Hamano
Carlos Martín Nieto writes: >> As packed-refs file is expected to be a text file, it is not >> surprising to get an undefined result if the it ends with an >> incomplete line. > > I guess that depends on what you mean by incomplete. I used that word in the POSIX sense, i.e. http://pubs.openg

Re: Possible regression in ref advertisement

2013-02-25 Thread Carlos Martín Nieto
On Mon, 2013-02-25 at 12:07 -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Carlos Martín Nieto writes: > > >> A shot in the dark, as I do not seem to be able to reproduce the issue > >> with anything that contains the commit. Perhaps your .git/packed-refs > >> is corrupt? > > > > My packed-refs file did not end

Re: Possible regression in ref advertisement

2013-02-25 Thread Junio C Hamano
Carlos Martín Nieto writes: >> A shot in the dark, as I do not seem to be able to reproduce the issue >> with anything that contains the commit. Perhaps your .git/packed-refs >> is corrupt? > > My packed-refs file did not end with LF. It seems it must or the parser > won't consider the last tag

Re: Possible regression in ref advertisement

2013-02-25 Thread Carlos Martín Nieto
On Mon, 2013-02-25 at 11:27 -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Carlos Martín Nieto writes: > > > On Mon, 2013-02-25 at 10:31 -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > ... > >> Interesting. "git ls-remote . | grep 1.8.0-" for maint, master, > >> next and pu produce identical results for me, all showing peeled

Re: Possible regression in ref advertisement

2013-02-25 Thread Junio C Hamano
Carlos Martín Nieto writes: > On Mon, 2013-02-25 at 10:31 -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > ... >> Interesting. "git ls-remote . | grep 1.8.0-" for maint, master, >> next and pu produce identical results for me, all showing peeled >> ones correctly. > > Bisection leads me to Peff's 435c8332 (2012-1

Re: Possible regression in ref advertisement

2013-02-25 Thread Carlos Martín Nieto
On Mon, 2013-02-25 at 10:31 -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Carlos Martín Nieto writes: > > > Hi all, > > > > When testing to see if a different implementation was in shape, I came > > across something odd where newer git doesn't advertise one of the refs > > in the git repo. > > > > Running `git

Re: Possible regression in ref advertisement

2013-02-25 Thread Junio C Hamano
Carlos Martín Nieto writes: > Hi all, > > When testing to see if a different implementation was in shape, I came > across something odd where newer git doesn't advertise one of the refs > in the git repo. > > Running `git ls-remote .` or `git-upload-pack` in my git repo, newer git > versions omit

Possible regression in ref advertisement

2013-02-25 Thread Carlos Martín Nieto
Hi all, When testing to see if a different implementation was in shape, I came across something odd where newer git doesn't advertise one of the refs in the git repo. Running `git ls-remote .` or `git-upload-pack` in my git repo, newer git versions omit peeling the v1.8.0-rc3 tag. The diff betwe