Re: does a successful 'git gc' imply 'git fsck'

> Sitaram Chamarty <sitaramc@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> If I could assume that a successful 'git gc' means an fsck is not
>> needed, I'd save a lot of time.  Hence my question.
>
> When it does "repack -a", it at least scans the whole history so you
> would be sure that all the commits and trees are readable for the
> purpose of enumerating the objects referred by them (and a bit flip
> in them will likely be noticed by zlib inflation).
>
> But a "gc" does not necessarily run "repack -a" when it does not see
> too many pack files, so it can end up scanning only the surface of
> the history to collect the recently created loose objects into a
> pack, and stop its traversal without going into existing packfiles.