| Message ID | 18f38075b3c70748894ad6b2e1158f2b17460845.1625155693.git.gitgitgadget@gmail.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Superseded |
| Headers | show |
| Series | cat-file: reuse ref-filter logic | expand |
On Thu, Jul 01 2021, ZheNing Hu via GitGitGadget wrote: > From: ZheNing Hu <adlternative@gmail.com> > > Use `has_object_file()` in `batch_one_object()` to check > whether the input object exists. This can help us reject > the missing oid when we let `cat-file --batch` use ref-filter > logic later. > > Mentored-by: Christian Couder <christian.couder@gmail.com> > Mentored-by: Hariom Verma <hariom18599@gmail.com> > Signed-off-by: ZheNing Hu <adlternative@gmail.com> > --- > builtin/cat-file.c | 7 +++++++ > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/builtin/cat-file.c b/builtin/cat-file.c > index 243fe6844bc..59a86412fd0 100644 > --- a/builtin/cat-file.c > +++ b/builtin/cat-file.c > @@ -428,6 +428,13 @@ static void batch_one_object(const char *obj_name, > return; > } > > + if (!has_object_file(&data->oid)) { > + printf("%s missing\n", > + obj_name ? obj_name : oid_to_hex(&data->oid)); > + fflush(stdout); > + return; > + } > + > batch_object_write(obj_name, scratch, opt, data); > } In 12/15 the old "missing" is removed, so is this strictly redundant to what's in batch_object_write() for now, does it change anything?
Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com> 于2021年7月2日周五 下午9:34写道： > > > On Thu, Jul 01 2021, ZheNing Hu via GitGitGadget wrote: > > > From: ZheNing Hu <adlternative@gmail.com> > > > > Use `has_object_file()` in `batch_one_object()` to check > > whether the input object exists. This can help us reject > > the missing oid when we let `cat-file --batch` use ref-filter > > logic later. > > > > Mentored-by: Christian Couder <christian.couder@gmail.com> > > Mentored-by: Hariom Verma <hariom18599@gmail.com> > > Signed-off-by: ZheNing Hu <adlternative@gmail.com> > > --- > > builtin/cat-file.c | 7 +++++++ > > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/builtin/cat-file.c b/builtin/cat-file.c > > index 243fe6844bc..59a86412fd0 100644 > > --- a/builtin/cat-file.c > > +++ b/builtin/cat-file.c > > @@ -428,6 +428,13 @@ static void batch_one_object(const char *obj_name, > > return; > > } > > > > + if (!has_object_file(&data->oid)) { > > + printf("%s missing\n", > > + obj_name ? obj_name : oid_to_hex(&data->oid)); > > + fflush(stdout); > > + return; > > + } > > + > > batch_object_write(obj_name, scratch, opt, data); > > } > > In 12/15 the old "missing" is removed, so is this strictly redundant to > what's in batch_object_write() for now, does it change anything? Both of these commits are used to pass some tests for checking missing objects. If we don't have this commit, "empty --batch-check notices missing object" in "t/t1006-cat-file.sh" will fail; If we don't have the commit "[GSOC] ref-filter: modify the error message and value in get_object", "bogus OFS_DELTA in packfile" in "t/t5313-pack-bounds-checks.sh" will fail. Thanks. -- ZheNing Hu
diff --git a/builtin/cat-file.c b/builtin/cat-file.c index 243fe6844bc..59a86412fd0 100644 --- a/builtin/cat-file.c +++ b/builtin/cat-file.c @@ -428,6 +428,13 @@ static void batch_one_object(const char *obj_name, return; } + if (!has_object_file(&data->oid)) { + printf("%s missing\n", + obj_name ? obj_name : oid_to_hex(&data->oid)); + fflush(stdout); + return; + } + batch_object_write(obj_name, scratch, opt, data); }