Subject: [PATCH 0/2] The merge-base logic vs missing commit objects (follow-up)

From: "Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 09 Mar 2024 14:09:55 +0000

Jeff King reported that Coverity pointed out a problem in the patch series
"The merge-base logic vs missing commit objects" (which made it into the
next branch already): The return value of merge_submodules() is assigned to
an unsigned, single-bit variable, which as a consequence is not able to hold
a negative value indicating a non-recoverable error.

I looked into this issue and am happy to report that there are no other
instances of the same issue in that patch series. The first patch in this
here patch series addresses that issue.

While looking into this issue I also noticed that the merge_submodule()
function did not even return negative values! This was an oversight on my
part (which I attribute with a large amount of self-compassion to my utter
lack of enthusiasm for submodules as a Git feature), and the second patch in
this here patch series addresses that.

This is a follow-up for
https://lore.kernel.org/git/[email-masked]/,
based on the js/merge-base-with-missing-commit branch.

Johannes Schindelin (2):
  merge-recursive: prepare for `merge_submodule()` to report errors
  merge-ort/merge-recursive: do report errors in `merge_submodule()`

 merge-ort.c       |  5 +++++
 merge-recursive.c | 21 +++++++++++++++------
 2 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

base-commit: caaf1a2942c25c1f1a15818b718c9f641e52beef
Published-As: https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git/releases/tag/pr-1686%2Fdscho%2Fmerge-base-and-missing-objects-followup-v1
Fetch-It-Via: git fetch https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git pr-1686/dscho/merge-base-and-missing-objects-followup-v1
Pull-Request: https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git/pull/1686
-- 
gitgitgadget