Re: [PATCH 4/3] fsck: check even zero-entry index files

> On Fri, Feb 24, 2023 at 09:30:44AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> 
>> So we had a separate worktree with its index pointing at an object
>> by its resolve-undo (or cache-tree) extension, but somehow lost that
>> object to gc (I agree with your assessment that it should no longer
>> happen since 2017).  gc these days knows about looking at the index
>> of all worktrees, finds the issue, and stops for safety.  fsck that
>> is run in the primary worktree may not have noticed but fsck run
>> from that worktree would notice the issue.
>>
>> Sounds like a frustrating one.  
>>
>> Thanks, both, for finding and fixing.
> 
> I saw that this hit next, but I had a few fixups that I had planned to
> squash in. I saw you got the leak-fix one, but I have one more. Since
> this is the end of the cycle, we _could_ just squash it in when we
> rewind next. But having now written it as a patch on top, I think the
> explanation kind of merits its own commit.