While looping over multiple heads, an up-to-date head will clobber the `remote->need_pack` setting, preventing the rest of the machinery from building and downloading a pack-file, breaking fetches.
If the first call to release a no-longer-existent submodule freed
the object, the check if a second is needed would dereference the
data that was just freed.
When a submodule was inserted with a different path and name, the
return value from khash greater than zero was allowed to propagate
back out to the caller when it should really be zeroed. This led
to a possible crash when reloading submodules if that was the
first time that submodule data was loaded.
The reload_all call could end up dereferencing a NULL pointer if
there was an error while attempting to load the submodules config
data (i.e. invalid content in the gitmodules file). This fixes it.
This cleans up some places I missed that could hold onto submodule
references and cleans up the way in which the repository cache is
both reloaded and released so that existing submodule references
aren't destroyed inappropriately.
When a directory containing a .git directory (or even just a plain
gitlink) was found, libgit2 was going out of its way to treat it
specially. This seemed like it was necessary because the diff
code was not originally emulating Git's behavior for untracked
directories correctly (i.e. scanning for ignored vs untracked items
inside). Now that libgit2 diff mimics Git's untracked directory
behavior, the special handling for contained Git repos is actually
incorrect and this commit rips it out.
`git_submodule` objects were already refcounted internally in case
the submodule name was different from the path at which it was
stored. This makes that refcounting externally used as well, so
`git_submodule_lookup` and `git_submodule_add_setup` return an
object that requires a `git_submodule_free` when done.
As a way to speed up the cases where we need to hide some commits, we
find out what the merge bases are so we know to stop marking commits as
uninteresting and avoid walking down a potentially very large amount of
commits which we will never see. There are however two oversights in
current code.
The merge-base finding algorithm fails to recognize that if it is only
given one commit, there can be no merge base. It instead walks down the
whole ancestor chain needlessly. Make it return an empty list
immediately in this situation.
The revwalk does not know whether the user has asked to hide any commits
at all. In situation where the user pushes multiple commits but doesn't
hide any, the above fix wouldn't do the trick. Keep track of whether the
user wants to hide any commits and only run the merge-base finding
algorithm when it's needed.
