On Mon, Nov 05, 2007 at 01:17:14PM -0500, Daniel Barkalow wrote:

quoted text
> I think this is the bit that's wrong. I blame Jeff, in 334f4831. :)
> 
> The issue is that, in the previous version, we'd hit a continue on the 
> not-an-ancestor message and not reach the update_tracking_ref() section 
> for that ref. In 334f4831, all of the updating is after the loop, and it 
> doesn't filter out the refs that didn't actually get pushed.

Nope, that's not the problem. We _only_ update any tracking refs at all
if ret == 0, and if we fail to push, then we are setting ret to -2.

Hrm. Oh wait, it looks like we then totally write over the current value
of 'ret' when we do pack_objects. Oops.

I'm unclear how to fix this, as I'm not really sure what ret is
_supposed_ to be communicating. What does the '-2' mean, as compared to
a '-4'? Should we be doing a 'ret += pack_objects(out, remote_refs)' or
some other bit-masking magic?

-Peff
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html