Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxx> writes: > On Fri, 29 Dec 2006, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> >> I really need a sanity checking on this one. I think I got the >> botched pipeline fixed with the patch I am replying to, but I do >> not understand the waitpid() business. Care to enlighten me? > > I think it was a beginning of a half-hearted attempt to check the exit > status of the rev-list in case something went wrong. > > Which we simply don't do, so if git-rev-list ends up with some problem > (due to a corrupt git repo or something), it will just send a partial > pack. > > For some reason I thought we had fixed that by just generating the object > list internally, but I guess we don't do that. That's just stupid. We > should make "send-pack.c" use > > list-heads | git pack-objects --revs > > list-heads | git-rev-list --stdin | git-pack-objects > > because as it is now, I think send-pack is more fragile than it needs to > be. > > Or maybe I'm just confused. Dont' worry, you are no more confused than I am ;-). "I thought we've done the 'pack-objects --revs' for the upload-pack side but haven't done so on the send-pack side." was what I initially wrote, but apparently we haven't. On the other hand, I think upload-pack gets error termination from rev-list right. It seems that repack is the only thing that uses the internal rev-list. - 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