archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason" <>
To: Junio C Hamano <>
Cc:, "Clemens Fruhwirth" <>,
	"Jan Pokorný" <>,
	"Corentin BOMPARD" <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] pull, fetch: fix segfault in --set-upstream option
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2021 22:20:46 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <xmqqfsupwose.fsf@gitster.g>

On Tue, Aug 31 2021, Junio C Hamano wrote:

> Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason  <> writes:
>>> Testing the new behaviour is a good idea.  I also agree with you
>>> that die() would be more appropriate and does not risk regression,
>>> if the original behaviour was to segfault.
>> Indeed. I changed it due to your upthread
>> <xmqqsg0anxix.fsf@gitster.g>.
>> I think doing s/warning/die/ here makes sense, but similarly to the
>> above comment: Let's punt on that and do it separately from this
>> narrow segfault fix. If and when we change that we should change
>> various other "warning()" around this codepath to "die()" as well.
> I do not think that can be thrown into the same bin as "should UI
> give irrelevant details?" issue.  If you make it not to segfault and
> give just a warning(), it becomes impossible to make it die() later.
> If we all agree that die() is a better action, that must be done
> now, or it will become never once the change is released to the
> field.

Because someone might have been relying on the current behavior of
segfaulting to stop their script? And a mere warning() would break
things for them by having the script "work" if this patch were to make
it into a release?

I think it's unlikely that anyone's running into this in the wild as
anything but a one-off, and in any case whether or not we segfault, warn
or die the behavior of fetch at this point is to have already finished
the fetch itself.

We're merely doing some post-fetch work of setting config etc. Both
before and after this patch we won't be setting the upstream config. But
yes, the exit code will change from a segfault to successful exit.

I think the first priority should be to just narrowly fix the segfault &
leave refactoring of e.g. having fetch do sanity checking on all options
before doing work for later, especially as we're almost 2 months into no
fix for the segfault landing on "master" after the first working patch
to fix it, so if we have that all wait on agreeing on the perfect
behavior for fetch error handling...

  reply	other threads:[~2021-08-31 20:29 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-07-05 15:46 git pull --set-upstream segfaults on branchless repo Clemens Fruhwirth
2021-07-19 10:04 ` Jan Pokorný
2021-07-19 14:30   ` [PATCH] pull, fetch: fix segfault in --set-upstream option Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2021-07-19 15:17     ` Junio C Hamano
2021-08-23 12:56     ` [PATCH v2] " Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2021-08-24  7:30       ` Clemens Fruhwirth
2021-08-24  8:49         ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2021-08-30 14:41       ` [PATCH v3] " Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2021-08-30 17:46         ` Junio C Hamano
2021-08-31 13:58         ` [PATCH v4] " Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2021-08-31 16:40           ` Junio C Hamano
2021-08-31 20:20             ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason [this message]
2021-09-01 17:44               ` Junio C Hamano

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).