Re: The case for two trees in a commit ("How to make rebase less modal")
- From
Ramsay Jones <ramsay@ramsayjones.plus.com>
- Date
- Mar 1, 2018, 01:15 UTC
- Message-ID
- <a2c44a68-9fc6-5998-6d84-aba73ea65a61@ramsayjones.plus.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <CAGZ79ka6PXgs+JDicaQYWYSKgEthj0A-2bBaRcdp_0T2H+sREA@mail.gmail.com>
On 28/02/18 23:30, Stefan Beller wrote:
Show 14 quoted lines
> $ git hash-object --stdin -w -t commit <<EOF > tree c70b4a33a0089f15eb3b38092832388d75293e86 > parent 105d5b91138ced892765a84e771a061ede8d63b8 > author Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com> 1519859216 -0800 > committer Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com> 1519859216 -0800 > tree 5495266479afc9a4bd9560e9feac465ed43fa63a > test commit > EOF > 19abfc3bf1c5d782045acf23abdf7eed81e16669 > $ git fsck |grep 19abfc3bf1c5d782045acf23abdf7eed81e16669 > $ > > So it is technically possible to create a commit with two tree entries > and fsck is not complaining.
Hmm, it's a while since I looked at that code, but I don't think you have a commit with two trees - the second 'tree <sha1>' line is just part of the commit message, isn't it?
ATB, Ramsay Jones