Jeff King <p...@peff.net> writes: > I suspect the issue is that read-tree populates the cache-tree index > extension, and then write-tree omits the object write before it even > gets to write_sha1_file().
Wait a minute. The entries in the index and trees in the cache-tree are root of "still in use" traversal for the purpose of pruning, which makes the "something like this" patch unnecessary for the real index file. And for temporary index files that is kept for 6 months, touching tree objects that cache-tree references is irrelevant---the blobs recorded in the "list of objects" part of the index will go stale, which is a lot more problematic.
