From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2026 19:40:25 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] fetch.c: defer fetch.followRemoteHEAD validation
Message-ID: <xmqqo6dlt906.fsf@gitster.g>
In-Reply-To: <20260925192658.1166-1-colinlewishinton@gmail.com>

Colin Hinton <colinlewishinton@gmail.com> writes:

>  struct fetch_config {
>  	enum display_format display_format;
> -	enum follow_remote_head_settings follow_remote_head;
> +	char *follow_remote_head_raw;
>  	int all;
>  	int prune;
>  	int prune_tags;
> @@ -176,24 +176,31 @@ static int git_fetch_config(const char *k, const char *v,
>  	}
>  
>  	if (!strcmp(k, "fetch.followremotehead")) {
> -		if (!v)
> -			return config_error_nonbool(k);
> -		else if (!strcmp(v, "never"))
> -			fetch_config->follow_remote_head = FOLLOW_REMOTE_NEVER;
> -		else if (!strcmp(v, "create"))
> -			fetch_config->follow_remote_head = FOLLOW_REMOTE_CREATE;
> -		else if (!strcmp(v, "warn"))
> -			fetch_config->follow_remote_head = FOLLOW_REMOTE_WARN;
> -		else if (!strcmp(v, "always"))
> -			fetch_config->follow_remote_head = FOLLOW_REMOTE_ALWAYS;
> -		else
> -			warning(_("unrecognized fetch.followRemoteHEAD value '%s' ignored"), v);
> +		free(fetch_config->follow_remote_head_raw);
> +		fetch_config->follow_remote_head_raw = xstrdup(v);

This will segfault when !v, so

	fetch_config->follow_remote_head_raw = xstrdup_or_null(v);

With that change,

> +static enum follow_remote_head_settings get_follow_remote_head(const char *setting)
> +{
> +	if (!setting)
> +		die(_("missing value for 'fetch.followRemoteHEAD'"));
> +	else if (!strcmp(setting, "never"))
> +		return FOLLOW_REMOTE_NEVER;
> +	else if (!strcmp(setting, "create"))
> +		return FOLLOW_REMOTE_CREATE;
> +	else if (!strcmp(setting, "warn"))
> +		return FOLLOW_REMOTE_WARN;
> +	else if (!strcmp(setting, "always"))
> +		return FOLLOW_REMOTE_ALWAYS;
> +	warning(_("unrecognized fetch.followRemoteHEAD value '%s' ignored"), setting);
> +	return FOLLOW_REMOTE_UNCONFIGURED;
> +}

This would do a reasonable job.

We should do something similar to what remote.c parses for
consistency, but other than that, it seems this topic is moving in
the right direction.

Thanks.