Re: What's cooking in git.git (Dec 2016, #05; Mon, 19)

From: Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu>
Date: Dec 27, 2016, 18:22 UTC
Message-ID: <b715d8af-850a-ef32-921d-f52a89d8466c@alum.mit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <xmqqd1gdcmwn.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>

On 12/27/2016 06:16 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:

Show 19 quoted lines

> Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu> writes:
> 
>> Sorry I didn't notice this earlier, but the `LOCK_REPORT_ON_ERROR`
>> constant introduced by
>>
>>     3f061bf "lockfile: LOCK_REPORT_ON_ERROR", 2016-12-07
>>
>> sets that constant to the value 2,...
> 
> Sorry I didn't notice this earlier, either.  Thanks for spotting.
> 
> -- >8 --
> From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
> Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2016 09:12:09 -0800
> Subject: [PATCH] lockfile: move REPORT_ON_ERROR bit elsewhere
> 
> There was LOCK_NO_DEREF defined as 2 = 1<<1 with the same value,
> which was missed due to a huge comment block.  Deconflict by moving
> the new one to 4 = 1<<2 for now.

The fix is obviously correct. I'm not sure I like it that comments are being blamed for mistakes :-P

Perhaps defining these constants within an `enum` would make it clearer that they are a group and help prevent problems like this in the future (though that could be done later rather than as part of this hot fix).

Michael

Show 19 quoted lines

> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
> ---
>  lockfile.h | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/lockfile.h b/lockfile.h
> index 16775a7d79..7b715f9e77 100644
> --- a/lockfile.h
> +++ b/lockfile.h
> @@ -137,7 +137,7 @@ struct lock_file {
>   * ... this flag can be passed instead to return -1 and give the usual
>   * error message upon an error.
>   */
> -#define LOCK_REPORT_ON_ERROR 2
> +#define LOCK_REPORT_ON_ERROR 4
>  
>  /*
>   * Usually symbolic links in the destination path are resolved. This
>