Anish R Athalye <aathalye@xxxxxxx> writes: > This is related to the change made in f06ab027efd2 (rev-list: allow cached > objects in existence check). > > That patch seemed designed to allow the workflow where the empty tree is > missing from the object store, so > `git cat-file -e 4b825dc642cb6eb9a060e54bf8d69288fbee4904` and > `git rev-list --objects 4b825dc642cb6eb9a060e54bf8d69288fbee4904` > both return success even when the object is not physically present. That sounds buggy. I know git knows about both empty tree and empty blob, but replacing the empty tree object name with the empty blob object name in the above in a freshly-created empty repository gives me errors from both of them, which is what I'd expect. > However, in the same situation: > > $ git fsck > [...] > missing tree 4b825dc642cb6eb9a060e54bf8d69288fbee4904 ... and if some other tree references to the empty tree (which is unusual---I do not think we record such a tree, but some third-party tools might), it is understandable fsck would complain. > I'm not sure if this is the intended behavior (the tree is indeed missing, so > in some sense, this is reasonable). But it seems somewhat confusing that it > disagrees with the interrogation commands.
