From: Johannes Schindelin Date: Fri, 02 Jan 2009 21:59:47 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] unpack-trees: fix path search bug in verify_absent Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <1230843273-11056-3-git-send-email-drizzd@aon.at> Hi, On Thu, 1 Jan 2009, Clemens Buchacher wrote: > Commit 0cf73755 (unpack-trees.c: assume submodules are clean during > check-out) changed an argument to verify_absent from 'path' to 'ce', > which is however shadowed by a local variable of the same name. This explanation makes sense. However, this: > @@ -289,7 +289,8 @@ static int unpack_nondirectories(int n, unsigned long mask, unsigned long dirmas > return 0; > } > > -static int unpack_callback(int n, unsigned long mask, unsigned long dirmask, struct name_entry *names, struct traverse_info *info) > +static int unpack_callback(int n, unsigned long mask, unsigned long dirmask, > + struct name_entry *names, struct traverse_info *info) > { > struct cache_entry *src[5] = { NULL, }; > struct unpack_trees_options *o = info->data; ... is distracting during review, and this: > @@ -517,22 +518,22 @@ static int verify_clean_subdirectory(struct cache_entry *ce, const char *action, > namelen = strlen(ce->name); > pos = index_name_pos(o->src_index, ce->name, namelen); > if (0 <= pos) > - return cnt; /* we have it as nondirectory */ > + return 0; /* we have it as nondirectory */ > pos = -pos - 1; > for (i = pos; i < o->src_index->cache_nr; i++) { ... is not accounted for in the commit message. Intended or not, that is the question. Ciao, Dscho "whether 'tis noble"