From: Todd Zullinger <tmz@pobox.com>
Date: Wed, 23 May 2018 22:23:58 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] rev-parse: verify that commit looked up is not NULL
Message-ID: <20180523222358.GW26695@zaya.teonanacatl.net>
In-Reply-To: <20180523221901.GV26695@zaya.teonanacatl.net>

I wrote:
> Thanks.  This fixes the segfault.  While I was testing this,
> I wondered if the following cases should differ:

Nevermind me.  Jeff beat me to a reply and included much
more useful details about why this occurs and suggestions
for fixing it. :)

> #          f*40
> $ ./git-rev-parse ffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff^@ ; echo $?
> 0
> 
> #          f*39
> $ ./git-rev-parse fffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff^@ ; echo $?
> fffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff^@
> fatal: ambiguous argument 'fffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff^@': unknown revision or path not in the working tree.
> Use '--' to separate paths from revisions, like this:
> 'git <command> [<revision>...] -- [<file>...]'
> 128
> 
> Looking a little further, this is deeper than the rev-parse
> handling.  The difference in how these invalid refs are
> handled appears in 'git show' as well.  With 'git show' a
> (different) fatal error is returned in both cases.
> 
> #          f*40
> $ git show ffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff
> fatal: bad object ffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff
> 
> #          39*f
> $ git show fffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff
> fatal: ambiguous argument 'fffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff': unknown revision or path not in the working tree.
> Use '--' to separate paths from revisions, like this:
> 'git <command> [<revision>...] -- [<file>...]'
> 
> Should rev-parse return an error as well, rather than
> silenty succeeding?

-- 
Todd
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
How can I tell that the past isn't a fiction designed to account for
the discrepancy between my immediate physical sensation and my state
of mind?
    -- Douglas Adams