From: Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu>
Date: Mon, 08 Jun 2015 15:17:11 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] fsck_handle_reflog_sha1(): new function
Message-ID: <5575B1F7.8030400@alum.mit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <xmqqwpzeck72.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com>

On 06/08/2015 05:07 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu> writes:
> 
>> New function, extracted from fsck_handle_reflog_ent(). The extra
>> is_null_sha1() test for the new reference is currently unnecessary, as
>> reflogs are deleted when the reference itself is deleted. But it
>> doesn't hurt, either.
> 
> I think we would crash with today's code in such a situation, but
> wouldn't we want to diagnose a 0{40} object name on the "new" side
> of the reflog entry as an error in the endgame state?

Good point. new_sha1 == NULL_SHA1 should be diagnosed and reported with
a distinct error message.

> [...]

Michael

-- 
Michael Haggerty
mhagger@alum.mit.edu