From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Feb 2024 16:34:48 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] upload-pack: only accept packfile-uris if we advertised it
Message-ID: <xmqqmsrji5zr.fsf@gitster.g>
In-Reply-To: <20240229054239.GA1669526@coredump.intra.peff.net>

Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:

> Sorry, this needs one tweak to pass under the sha256 CI job:
>
> diff --git a/t/t5702-protocol-v2.sh b/t/t5702-protocol-v2.sh
> index 902e42c1c0..1ef540f73d 100755
> --- a/t/t5702-protocol-v2.sh
> +++ b/t/t5702-protocol-v2.sh
> @@ -781,6 +781,7 @@ test_expect_success 'archive with custom path does not request v2' '
>  test_expect_success 'reject client packfile-uris if not advertised' '
>  	{
>  		packetize command=fetch &&
> +		packetize object-format=$(test_oid algo) &&
>  		printf 0001 &&
>  		packetize packfile-uris https &&
>  		packetize done &&
>
> Otherwise the server complains that the other side did not respect its
> advertised object-format (I sure am glad to have included the final
> "hey, this input works, right?" test there, as that is what caught it).

Ah, good finding.  Will use it to amend.

I wonder if it is still worth testing if the command is happy with
an input that lacks object-format capability under SHA-1 mode.  This
test piece is primarily about packfile-uris, so in that sense, we
are not all that interested in that unspecified client object-format
defaults to the initial value of serve.c:client_hash_algo (which is
SHA-1), and not testing that here is perfectly fine, I guess.

Thanks.