Re: [PATCH v13 05/13] reftable: clarify how empty tables should be written

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

 



"Han-Wen Nienhuys via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@xxxxxxxxx> writes:

> From: Han-Wen Nienhuys <hanwen@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> The format allows for some ambiguity, as a lone footer also starts
> with a valid file header. However, the current JGit code will barf on
> this. This commit codifies this behavior into the standard.

Nice to see the documentation being careful.

>
> Signed-off-by: Han-Wen Nienhuys <hanwen@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  Documentation/technical/reftable.txt | 7 +++++++
>  1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/technical/reftable.txt b/Documentation/technical/reftable.txt
> index 8bad9ade256..6223538d64e 100644
> --- a/Documentation/technical/reftable.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/technical/reftable.txt
> @@ -715,6 +715,13 @@ version)
>  
>  Once verified, the other fields of the footer can be accessed.
>  
> +Empty tables
> +++++++++++++
> +
> +A reftable may be empty. In this case, the file starts with a header
> +and is immediately followed by a footer.
> +
> +
>  Varint encoding
>  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^



[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]

  Powered by Linux