{"thread":{"id":"29180","subject":"[PATCH] docs: brush up obsolete bits of git-fsck manpage","startedAt":"2011-12-16T11:33:10Z","lastAt":"2011-12-17T06:10:26Z","messageCount":4,"participants":["Jeff King","Junio C Hamano"],"isPatch":true,"patchVersion":1,"patchTotal":null},"messages":[{"id":"181289","messageId":"20111216113310.GA16601@sigill.intra.peff.net","threadId":"29180","inReplyTo":null,"subject":"[PATCH] docs: brush up obsolete bits of git-fsck manpage","fromName":"Jeff King","fromEmail":"peff@peff.net","sentAt":"2011-12-16T11:33:10Z","receivedAt":"2011-12-16T11:33:10Z","isPatch":true,"sender":{"key":"peff@peff.net","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/45925?v=4"},"body":"After the description and options, the fsck manpage contains\nsome discussion about what it does. Over time, this\ndiscussion has become somewhat obsolete, both in content and\nformatting. In particular:\n\n  1. There are many options now, so starting the discussion\n     with \"It tests...\" makes it unclear whether we are\n     talking about the last option, or about the tool in\n     general. Let's start a new \"discussion\" section and\n     make our antecedent more clear.\n\n  2. It gave an example for --unreachable using for-each-ref\n     to mention all of the heads, saying that it will do \"a\n     _lot_ of verification\". This is hopelessly out-of-date,\n     as giving no arguments will check much more (reflogs,\n     the index, non-head refs).\n\n  3. It goes on to mention tests \"to be added\" (like tree\n     object sorting). We now have these tests.\n\nSigned-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>\n---\nI posted this here:\n\n  http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/181673/focus=181701\n\nand I think it simply got lost in the discussion.\n\nWe ended up discussing the possibility of deprecating refs on the\ncommand-line to fsck. I still think that's reasonable, but in the\nmeantime, this patch is a reasonable improvement.\n\n Documentation/git-fsck.txt |   26 ++++++++------------------\n 1 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)\n\ndiff --git a/Documentation/git-fsck.txt b/Documentation/git-fsck.txt\nindex 0a17b42..6c47395 100644\n--- a/Documentation/git-fsck.txt\n+++ b/Documentation/git-fsck.txt\n@@ -81,30 +81,20 @@ index file, all SHA1 references in .git/refs/*, and all reflogs (unless\n \tprogress status even if the standard error stream is not\n \tdirected to a terminal.\n \n-It tests SHA1 and general object sanity, and it does full tracking of\n-the resulting reachability and everything else. It prints out any\n-corruption it finds (missing or bad objects), and if you use the\n-'--unreachable' flag it will also print out objects that exist but\n-that aren't reachable from any of the specified head nodes.\n-\n-So for example\n-\n-\tgit fsck --unreachable HEAD \\\n-\t\t$(git for-each-ref --format=\"%(objectname)\" refs/heads)\n+DISCUSSION\n+----------\n \n-will do quite a _lot_ of verification on the tree. There are a few\n-extra validity tests to be added (make sure that tree objects are\n-sorted properly etc), but on the whole if 'git fsck' is happy, you\n-do have a valid tree.\n+git-fsck tests SHA1 and general object sanity, and it does full tracking\n+of the resulting reachability and everything else. It prints out any\n+corruption it finds (missing or bad objects), and if you use the\n+'--unreachable' flag it will also print out objects that exist but that\n+aren't reachable from any of the specified head nodes (or the default\n+set, as mentioned above).\n \n Any corrupt objects you will have to find in backups or other archives\n (i.e., you can just remove them and do an 'rsync' with some other site in\n the hopes that somebody else has the object you have corrupted).\n \n-Of course, \"valid tree\" doesn't mean that it wasn't generated by some\n-evil person, and the end result might be crap. git is a revision\n-tracking system, not a quality assurance system ;)\n-\n Extracted Diagnostics\n ---------------------\n \n-- \n1.7.7.4.13.g57bf4\n"},{"id":"181334","messageId":"7vy5ucgsic.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org","threadId":"29180","inReplyTo":"20111216113310.GA16601@sigill.intra.peff.net","subject":"Re: [PATCH] docs: brush up obsolete bits of git-fsck manpage","fromName":"Junio C Hamano","fromEmail":"gitster@pobox.com","sentAt":"2011-12-16T20:40:11Z","receivedAt":"2011-12-16T20:40:11Z","isPatch":true,"sender":{"key":"gitster@pobox.com","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/54884?v=4"},"body":"Makes sense; thanks.\n\nBy the way did you hand-tweak your patch in any way?\n\nI am not complaining that it does not apply (it does), but I am curious\nhow you got the line that begins with \"corruption it finds ...\" neatly in\npreimage and postimage; it could become a common line but doing so makes\nthe patch unreadable and that is what I am getting from \"git show\" after\napplying the patch.\n"},{"id":"181362","messageId":"20111217012811.GC20225@sigill.intra.peff.net","threadId":"29180","inReplyTo":"7vy5ucgsic.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org","subject":"Re: [PATCH] docs: brush up obsolete bits of git-fsck manpage","fromName":"Jeff King","fromEmail":"peff@peff.net","sentAt":"2011-12-17T01:28:11Z","receivedAt":"2011-12-17T01:28:11Z","isPatch":true,"sender":{"key":"peff@peff.net","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/45925?v=4"},"body":"On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 12:40:11PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:\n\n> By the way did you hand-tweak your patch in any way?\n> \n> I am not complaining that it does not apply (it does), but I am curious\n> how you got the line that begins with \"corruption it finds ...\" neatly in\n> preimage and postimage; it could become a common line but doing so makes\n> the patch unreadable and that is what I am getting from \"git show\" after\n> applying the patch.\n\nNo, I don't think I tweaked it at all. You can fetch the original commit\n(888b4eb) at:\n\n  git://github.com/peff/git.git jk/fsck-docs\n\nRunning \"git show\" produces the same output as the patch I sent. I\ndouble-checked with older versions of git, and they all produce the same\noutput for me. Ditto for applying what I sent and running \"git show\" on\nthe result.\n\nUsing \"--patience\", on the other hand, does find it as a common line,\nWeird.\n\n-Peff\n"},{"id":"181367","messageId":"7vbor7g23x.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org","threadId":"29180","inReplyTo":"20111217012811.GC20225@sigill.intra.peff.net","subject":"Re: [PATCH] docs: brush up obsolete bits of git-fsck manpage","fromName":"Junio C Hamano","fromEmail":"gitster@pobox.com","sentAt":"2011-12-17T06:10:26Z","receivedAt":"2011-12-17T06:10:26Z","isPatch":true,"sender":{"key":"gitster@pobox.com","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/54884?v=4"},"body":"Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:\n\n> Using \"--patience\", on the other hand, does find it as a common line,\n\nAhh, that must be it.  Thanks, and sorry for the noise.\n"}]}