Re: Bug report: stash in upstream caused remote fetch to fail

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Jan 6, 2014, 16:16 UTC
Message-ID: <xmqqbnzpkrvk.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com>
In-Reply-To: <20140106152742.GA26221@sigill.intra.peff.net>

Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:

Show 25 quoted lines

> On Fri, Jan 03, 2014 at 04:12:51PM -0500, Matt Burke wrote:
>
>> + git init -q
>> + git fetch -q -fu ../../../other '+refs/*:refs/*'
>> fatal: bad object 9b985fbe6a2b783c16756077a8be261c94b6c197
>> error: ../../../other did not send all necessary objects
>
> I was going to ask you to send your repository, but I can easily
> reproduce here. I guess people don't run into it because it's uncommon
> to fetch the whole refs/ namespace from a non-bare repo (and bare repos
> do not tend to have stashes). Here's a minimal reproduction recipe:
>
>   git init repo &&
>   cd repo &&
>   echo content >foo &&
>   git add . &&
>   git commit -m foo &&
>   echo more >>foo &&
>   git stash &&
>   git init --bare sub &&
>   cd sub &&
>   git fetch .. 'refs/*:refs/*'
>
> It looks like we are not feeding refs/stash properly to pack-objects.
> I'll try to take a closer look later today.

I looked at this in the past and I vaguely recall that we reject it in the for-each-ref loop with check-ref-format saying "eh, that is a single-level name".

At that point I stopped digging, thinking it was a feature ;-) based on your exact observation about stash vs bare/non-bare.