Re: Index format v5

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 9:11 PM, Thomas Gummerer <t.gummerer@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> * "160-bit object name for the object that would result from writing
>>   this span of index as a tree."  Is this always valid?
>
> No, this is only valid if the entry count is not -1. It's clarified
> now.

..and..

> The entry_count in the index is only valid, if the cache-tree is valid,
> which is not always the case.

I think your trees are the cache-trees already. For invalid
cache-trees, you can just use all-zero sha-1 as the indicator. Then
entry_count can go away.
-- 
Duy
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]