Jeff King <p...@peff.net> writes: > The patch you are responding to is a fix-up for 9233887, which tweaked > the code and added those tests in the first place (I doubt it would work > for you, though, as it has a problem on case-insensitive filesystems). > >> But the sequence works as expected with a version built >> in September: > > Hmph. So that would mean my theory is not right. Or maybe I am not > accounting for something else in my analysis. > > I guess it is odd that the test right before the failing one passes (it > is basically that same sequence, with reflogs turned on for both > operations), which implies that we are properly getting EISDIR. The only > difference in the failing test is that reflogs are turned off for the > "git branch one" operation. But I cannot see why that would be broken if > the other one passes.
Hmph, or perhaps "branch -d one/two" fails to remove the reflog and does not notice the failure? But creation of "one" with reflog disabled shouldn't be affected in such a case, either. Puzzled... > I wish it were easy for me to ssh into a Windows VM and run gdb. ;) likewise. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
