Browse Source
A conflicted index can have multiple stage #1 entries when dealing with a criss-cross merge and using the "resolve" merge strategy. Plug the leak by reading only the first one of the same stage entries. Strictly speaking, this fix does change the semantics, in that we used to use the last stage #1 entry as the common ancestor when doing the plain-vanilla three-way merge, but with the leak fix, we will use the first stage #1 entry. But it is not a grave backward compatibility breakage. Either way, we are arbitrarily picking one of multiple stage #1 entries and using it, ignoring others, and there is no meaning in the ordering of these stage #1 entries. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>maint

1 changed files with 4 additions and 2 deletions
Loading…
Reference in new issue