Hi Peff, On Tue, May 19, 2020 at 02:40:04PM -0400, Jeff King wrote: > It _seems_ to work, because that's the case your invalid-shallow test is > covering. I'm just not sure if it works consistently, or what error we > might produce in some cases (e.g., saying "woah, what's the weird 0002 > packet" instead of "the server response ended unexpectedly" or > something). > > I suspect any remaining issues there are cosmetic, and it might be OK to > just discover them organically through use. But if you happen to have > done some poking around there, it would be nice to hear it. >From what I can tell, every time a packet is read using the reader in do_fetch_pack_v2(), we're careful about checking the packet type so we should be safe there. Also, when piping stuff over to index-pack and unpack-objects, it looks like the resulting call to recv_sideband() treats any control packets as flush packets so it should handle the 0002 fine. I could have missed checking some spots, though. But as far as I can tell, if it can't handle the 0002 properly, it was already buggy to begin with. I agree that we can let any remaining issues be shaken out through use. > Thanks for working on this. When we had the initial discussion, I was > really worried the solution was going to be quite nasty, but I think it > turned out to be reasonably nice. Thanks, Denton > -Peff
