On Thu, May 27 2021, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > Hi, > > Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: > >> Fix a blindspot in the tests added in the tests for the >> --allow-unknown-type feature, added in 39e4ae38804 (cat-file: teach >> cat-file a '--allow-unknown-type' option, 2015-05-03). >> >> Before this change all the tests would succeed if --allow-unknown-type >> was on by default, let's fix that by asserting that -t and -s die on a >> "garbage" type without --allow-unknown-type. > > nit: "tests added in the tests" seems oddly repetitive. > > More importantly, I'm curious about the desired behavior here. The > idea behind cat-file --allow-unknown-type is that I can use it to > inspect an invalid object, for example after it has been reported by > git fsck. The commit that introduced it (39e4ae3880, "cat-file: teach > cat-file a '--allow-unknown-type' option", 2015-05-03) gives the hint > "query broken/corrupt objects" in the documentation, so I figure > that's what it's for, and I'm sympathetic. > > But: why is that an option instead of something that we always do? > > In other words, is there some situation where I would not want the > more permissive behavior from cat-file against a bad object? Yes. I suggested as much in https://lore.kernel.org/git/87r1i4qf4h.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ For this series though I'm sticking to testing for the existing behavior + fixing the immediate fsck issues. I've got some local patches queued up for after this topic lands (after I re-roll it, re-submit etc.) that do that.
