Re: Crashes while trying to show tag objects with bad timestamps
- From
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
- Date
- Feb 22, 2013, 23:20 UTC
- Message-ID
- <7vppzsaqc5.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
- In-Reply-To
- <20130222230418.GC21579@sigill.intra.peff.net>
Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:
Show 16 quoted lines
> On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 02:53:48PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > >> > I guess we should probably issue a warning, too. Also disappointingly, >> > git-fsck does not seem to detect this breakage at all. >> >> Yes for the warning, > > Unfortunately, a good warning is harder than I had hoped. At the point > where we notice the problem, pp_user_info, we have very little context. > We can say only something like: > > warning: malformed date in ident 'Jeff King <peff@peff.net> BOGUS' > > but we cannot say in which object, or even that it was a "tagger" line > (and in some cases we do not even have an object, as in > make_cover_letter).
As pp_user_info() is called from very few places, I do not think it is unreasonable to add an output parameter (i.e. "unsigned *") to let the caller know that we made a best guess given malformed input and handle the error in the caller. The make_cover_letter() caller may look like:
pp_user_info(&pp, NULL, &sb, committer, encoding, &errors);
if (errors & PP_CORRUPT_DATE)
warning("unparsable datestamp in '%s'", committer);although it is unlikely to see this error in practice, given that committer is coming from git_committer_info(0) and would have the current timestamp.
Show 7 quoted lines
> I also took a look at parsing routine of "cat-file -p". It's totally > hand-rolled, separate from what "git show" does, and is not build on the > pretty-print code at all. I wonder, though, if it actually makes sense > to munge the date there. The commit-object pretty-printer for cat-file > just shows the object intact. It seems weirdly inconsistent that we > would munge tags just to rewrite the date. If you want a real > pretty-printer, you should be using porcelain like "show".
The whole "cat-file -p" is a historical wart, aka poor-man's "show". I do not even consider it a part of the plumbing. It is a fair game for Porcelainisque improvement ;-)