From: Ramsay Jones <ramsay@ramsayjones.plus.com>
Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2018 01:15:10 GMT
Subject: Re: The case for two trees in a commit ("How to make rebase less modal")
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:
> $ 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