Hi, On Tue, 27 Feb 2007, Geert Bosch wrote: > > On Feb 27, 2007, at 15:05, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > > On Tue, 27 Feb 2007, Geert Bosch wrote: > > > > > The object-count at the beginning of the pack is a little strange > > > for local on-disk pack files, as it is data that can easily be > > > derived. > > > > The SHA1 is also easily derived. So think of it as a doubly secure way > > to ensure integrity. > > > > Remember, there were some people unable to accept that SHA1 collisions > > are _unlikely_... > > Ah, you include the count because you don't trust the SHA1 and now you > can count that you got the right number of objects ;-) I don't know if it was included for that reason, but you can excuse it that way. :-) > It's just that I don't see a use for the count in a local on-disk pack. > In these cases we'll always have an index. We can keep the current > protocol for sending/receiving packs, no need to ever upgrade to v4 > there. But the protocol expects a valid pack! (Including a count...) Besides, the pack index is a purely local thin, reconstructed from the pack when fetching... Ciao, Dscho - 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