From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Date: Fri, 06 Oct 2017 06:05:43 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 2/2] entry.c: check if file exists after checkout
Message-ID: <20171006060542.llx4golnkuxksy7z@sigill.intra.peff.net>
In-Reply-To: <xmqqd160x16i.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>

On Fri, Oct 06, 2017 at 03:03:49PM +0900, Junio C Hamano wrote:

> Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:
> 
> > I don't know if we wanted to capture any of the reasoning behind using
> > error() here or not. Frankly, I'm not sure how to argue for it
> > succinctly. :) I'm happy with letting it live on in the list archive.
> 
> Are you talking about the "philosophical" thing?

Right, whether we ought to just mark the entry as stat-dirty and return
success.

> Because we cannot quite tell between the two cases (one is error--we
> wrote or we thought we wrote, but we cannot find it, the other is
> dubious--somebody was racing with us in the filesystem), I think it
> is reasonable to err on the safer side, even though an error abort
> while doing "as we know we wrote the thing that match the index, we
> might as well lstat and mark the cache entry as up-to-date" might be
> a bit irritating.

OK. I can live with that line of thought.

-Peff