Re: Possible regression in ref advertisement

From: Carlos Martín Nieto <cmn@elego.de>
Date: Feb 25, 2013, 19:54 UTC
Message-ID: <1361822092.30765.12.camel@centaur.cmartin.tk>
In-Reply-To: <7vip5gxkgy.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>

On Mon, 2013-02-25 at 11:27 -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:

Show 15 quoted lines

> Carlos Martín Nieto <cmn@elego.de> 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 (2012-10-04; upload-pack: use
> > peel_ref for ref advertisements) and reverting that commit brings the
> > -rc3^{} back.
> 
> 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 in the file to have a peeled target and mine didn't. I don't how the ended up this way but it looks like there's is a bug in the parser (or does the format force you to have LF at the end?)

cmn