These variables were unused and can be removed safely:
builtin-clone.c::cmd_clone(): use_local_hardlinks, use_separate_remote
builtin-fetch-pack.c::find_common(): len
builtin-remote.c::mv(): symref
diff.c::show_stats():show_stats(): total
diffcore-break.c::should_break(): base_size
fast-import.c::validate_raw_date(): date, sign
fsck.c::fsck_tree(): o_sha1, sha1
xdiff-interface.c::parse_num(): read_some
Signed-off-by: Benjamin Kramer <benny.kra@googlemail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
* maint:
Fix non-literal format in printf-style calls
git-submodule: Avoid printing a spurious message.
git ls-remote: make usage string match manpage
Makefile: help people who run 'make check' by mistake
These were found using gcc 4.3.2-1ubuntu11 with the warning:
warning: format not a string literal and no format arguments
Incorporated suggestions from Brandon Casey <casey@nrlssc.navy.mil>.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Many call sites use strbuf_init(&foo, 0) to initialize local
strbuf variable "foo" which has not been accessed since its
declaration. These can be replaced with a static initialization
using the STRBUF_INIT macro which is just as readable, saves a
function call, and takes up fewer lines.
Signed-off-by: Brandon Casey <casey@nrlssc.navy.mil>
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
ba002f3 (builtin-fsck: move common object checking code to fsck.c) did
more than what it claimed to. Most notably, it wrongly made an empty tree
object an error by pretending to only move code from fsck_tree() in
builtin-fsck.c to fsck_tree() in fsck.c, but in fact adding a bogus check
to barf on an empty tree.
An empty tree object is _unusual_. Recent porcelains try reasonably hard
not to let the user create a commit that contains such a tree. Perhaps
warning about them in git-fsck may have some merit.
HOWEVER.
Being unusual and being errorneous are two quite different things. This
is especially true now we seem to use the same fsck_$object() code in
places other than git-fsck itself. For example, receive-pack should not
reject unusual objects, even if it would be a good idea to tighten it to
reject incorrect ones.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The requirements are:
* it may not crash on NULL pointers
* a callback function is needed, as index-pack/unpack-objects
need to do different things
* the type information is needed to check the expected <-> real type
and print better error messages
Signed-off-by: Martin Koegler <mkoegler@auto.tuwien.ac.at>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The earlier change df391b192 to rename fsck-objects to fsck broke
fsck-objects. This should fix it again.
Signed-off-by: Mark Wooding <mdw@distorted.org.uk>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
