Jonathan Nieder <jrnie...@gmail.com> writes: > In other words, why not use something like this? > > write_index: optionally allow broken null sha1s > > Commit 4337b58 (do not write null sha1s to on-disk index, 2012-07-28) > added a safety check preventing git from writing null sha1s into the > index. The intent was to catch errors in other parts of the code that > might let such an entry slip into the index (or worse, a tree). > > Some existing repositories have some invalid trees that contain null > sha1s already, though. Until 4337b58, a common way to clean this up > would be to use git-filter-branch's index-filter to repair such broken > entries. That now fails when filter-branch tries to write out the > index. > > Introduce a GIT_ALLOW_NULL_SHA1 environment variable to relax this check > and make it easier to recover from such a history.
I found this version more readable than Peff's (albeit slightly). > After this patch, do you think (in a separate change) it would make > sense for cache-tree.c::update_one() to check for null sha1 and error > out unless GIT_ALLOW_NULL_SHA1 is true? That would let us get rid of > the caveat from the last paragraph. Hmm, interesting thought. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
