* [PATCH] pretend-sha1: grave bugfix.
@ 2007-02-16 1:16 Junio C Hamano
2007-02-16 4:05 ` Johannes Schindelin
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Junio C Hamano @ 2007-02-16 1:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: git
We stashed away objects that we pretend to have, but did not save the
actual data.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
---
* I wonder how recent merge-recursive with multiple merge bases
(or an empty one) ever worked with this bug. Am I
hallucinating?
sha1_file.c | 4 +++-
1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/sha1_file.c b/sha1_file.c
index b83f59f..2c87031 100644
--- a/sha1_file.c
+++ b/sha1_file.c
@@ -1545,11 +1545,13 @@ int pretend_sha1_file(void *buf, unsigned long len, const char *type, unsigned c
co = &cached_objects[cached_object_nr++];
co->size = len;
co->type = strdup(type);
+ co->buf = xmalloc(len);
+ memcpy(co->buf, buf, len);
hashcpy(co->sha1, sha1);
return 0;
}
-void * read_sha1_file(const unsigned char *sha1, char *type, unsigned long *size)
+void *read_sha1_file(const unsigned char *sha1, char *type, unsigned long *size)
{
unsigned long mapsize;
void *map, *buf;
--
1.5.0.31.g78e90
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] pretend-sha1: grave bugfix.
2007-02-16 1:16 [PATCH] pretend-sha1: grave bugfix Junio C Hamano
@ 2007-02-16 4:05 ` Johannes Schindelin
2007-02-16 5:09 ` Shawn O. Pearce
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Johannes Schindelin @ 2007-02-16 4:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Junio C Hamano; +Cc: git
Hi,
On Thu, 15 Feb 2007, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> * I wonder how recent merge-recursive with multiple merge bases
> (or an empty one) ever worked with this bug. Am I
> hallucinating?
Probably the fact helped that merge-recursive only pretends
zero-sized blobs.
Ciao,
Dscho
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] pretend-sha1: grave bugfix.
2007-02-16 4:05 ` Johannes Schindelin
@ 2007-02-16 5:09 ` Shawn O. Pearce
2007-02-16 7:29 ` Junio C Hamano
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Shawn O. Pearce @ 2007-02-16 5:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Johannes Schindelin; +Cc: Junio C Hamano, git
Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Feb 2007, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
> > * I wonder how recent merge-recursive with multiple merge bases
> > (or an empty one) ever worked with this bug. Am I
> > hallucinating?
>
> Probably the fact helped that merge-recursive only pretends
> zero-sized blobs.
Most definately. We never look at the pointer to an object's data if
len == 0, which it does in this case of merge-recursive's empty tree.
Aren't we using this for git-blame --contents? How'd that ever
work for a non-empty file?
--
Shawn.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] pretend-sha1: grave bugfix.
2007-02-16 5:09 ` Shawn O. Pearce
@ 2007-02-16 7:29 ` Junio C Hamano
0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Junio C Hamano @ 2007-02-16 7:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Shawn O. Pearce; +Cc: Johannes Schindelin, git
"Shawn O. Pearce" <spearce@spearce.org> writes:
> Aren't we using this for git-blame --contents? How'd that ever
> work for a non-empty file?
My guess is that git-blame's blob handling has its own built-in
cache to avoid read_sha1_file(), and that single "initial" blob
is primed by hand, so read_sha1_file() is usually not called for
that object name.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2007-02-16 7:29 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2007-02-16 1:16 [PATCH] pretend-sha1: grave bugfix Junio C Hamano
2007-02-16 4:05 ` Johannes Schindelin
2007-02-16 5:09 ` Shawn O. Pearce
2007-02-16 7:29 ` Junio C Hamano
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.