On Sat, Feb 24, 2018 at 10:34:29AM +0700, Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy wrote:
> This reverts commit e26f7f19b6c7485f04234946a59ab8f4fd21d6d1. The root
> problem, git clone not setting up the_hash_algo, has been fixed in the
> previous patch.
>
> Since this is a dangerous move and could potentially break stuff after
> release (and leads to workaround like the reverted commit), the
> workaround technically remains, but is hidden behind a new environment
> variable GIT_HASH_FIXUP. This should let the users continue to use git
> while we fix the problem. This variable can be deleted after one or two
> releases.
>
> Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclouds@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> common-main.c | 10 ++++++++++
> repository.c | 2 +-
> t/helper/test-dump-split-index.c | 2 ++
> 3 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/common-main.c b/common-main.c
> index 6a689007e7..fbfa98c3b8 100644
> --- a/common-main.c
> +++ b/common-main.c
> @@ -1,6 +1,7 @@
> #include "cache.h"
> #include "exec_cmd.h"
> #include "attr.h"
> +#include "repository.h"
>
> /*
> * Many parts of Git have subprograms communicate via pipe, expect the
> @@ -40,5 +41,14 @@ int main(int argc, const char **argv)
>
> restore_sigpipe_to_default();
>
> + /*
> + * Temporary recovery measure while hashing code is being
> + * refactored. This variable should be gone after everybody
> + * has used the_hash_algo in one or two releases and nobody
> + * complains anything.
> + */
> + if (getenv("GIT_HASH_FIXUP"))
> + repo_set_hash_algo(the_repository, GIT_HASH_SHA1);
> +
> return cmd_main(argc, argv);
> }
> diff --git a/repository.c b/repository.c
> index 4ffbe9bc94..0d715f4fdb 100644
> --- a/repository.c
> +++ b/repository.c
> @@ -5,7 +5,7 @@
>
> /* The main repository */
> static struct repository the_repo = {
> - NULL, NULL, NULL, NULL, NULL, NULL, NULL, NULL, NULL, &the_index, &hash_algos[GIT_HASH_SHA1], 0, 0
> + NULL, NULL, NULL, NULL, NULL, NULL, NULL, NULL, NULL, &the_index, NULL, 0, 0
I'm wondering, now that you have the name field for the unknown value,
if that might be a better choice here than NULL. I don't have a strong
preference either way, so whatever you decide here is fine.
--
brian m. carlson / brian with sandals: Houston, Texas, US
https://www.crustytoothpaste.net/~bmc | My opinion only
OpenPGP: https://keybase.io/bk2204
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
