From: Jon Forrest Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2025 19:10:11 GMT Subject: Re: Minor Bug in git cat-file (git 2.50)? Message-ID: In-Reply-To: On 8/11/25 1:54 AM, Patrick Steinhardt wrote: Thanks to you and Junio for looking at this. I agree that this shouldn't be considered a high priority bug. Do you agree that the below should be what I see? >> # I would have expected: >> hint: 78981922613b2afb6025042ff6bd878ac1994e85 blob >> hint: 78981922613b2afb6025042ff6bd878ac1994e86 blob The reason I'm doing this is because, just for fun, I'm trying to implement the disambiguation code in Go, and I needed a test case. > Hm. I think the problem here is that you intentfully corrupt the > repository by copying the blob to a different name. I didn't intentionally corrupt the repository but I couldn't think of any other way to do what I needed to do. How would you have done this? > I'm not really sure that this is something that we need to fix -- the > repository is corrupt, and git-fsck(1) should tell you so. Here's what git-fsck said: % git fsck Checking ref database: 100% (1/1), done. error: ee1a0d672b283dc03c94a266647e505ad340dc29: hash-path mismatch, found at: .git/objects/ee/1a0d672b283dc03c94a266647e505ad340dc30 Checking object directories: 100% (256/256), done. dangling tree 4b825dc642cb6eb9a060e54bf8d69288fbee4904 dangling tree d4607c312181a2fdbb66e8accb5b006156b6b733 > Did you hit any real world scenario where this has happened > in the wild without intentfully corrupting the repository? No > Or given that you explicitly mention Git 2.50, has the behaviour > changed recently? I mentioned Git 2.50 because I wanted to write a useful bug report. I have no idea if the behavior has changed. Thanks for your work. Jon