Taylor Blau <me@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> When performing a garbage collection operation on a repository with
> unreachable objects, Git makes its decision on what to do with those
> object(s) bed on how recent the objects are or not. Generally speaking,
s/bed/based/ ?
> +gc.recentObjectsHook::
> + When considering whether or not to remove an object (either when
> + generating a cruft pack or storing unreachable objects as
> + loose), use the shell to execute the specified command(s).
> + Interpret their output as object IDs which Git will consider as
> + "recent", regardless of their age. By treating their mtimes as
> + "now", any objects (and their descendants) mentioned in the
> + output will be kept regardless of their true age.
Thanks! I think this version will be clear to prospective users.
> +static int run_one_gc_recent_objects_hook(struct oidset *set,
> + const char *args)
> +{
> + struct child_process cmd = CHILD_PROCESS_INIT;
> + struct strbuf buf = STRBUF_INIT;
> + FILE *out;
> + int ret = 0;
> +
> + cmd.use_shell = 1;
> + cmd.out = -1;
> +
> + strvec_push(&cmd.args, args);
> +
> + if (start_command(&cmd))
> + return -1;
> +
> + out = xfdopen(cmd.out, "r");
> + while (strbuf_getline(&buf, out) != EOF) {
> + struct object_id oid;
> + const char *rest;
> +
> + if (parse_oid_hex(buf.buf, &oid, &rest) || *rest) {
> + ret = error(_("invalid extra cruft tip: '%s'"), buf.buf);
To be consistent with the other error message, perhaps s/extra cruft
tip/additional recent object/?
> +static void load_gc_recent_objects(struct recent_data *data)
> +{
> + const struct string_list *programs;
> + int ret = 0;
> + size_t i;
> +
> + data->extra_recent_oids_loaded = 1;
> +
> + if (git_config_get_string_multi("gc.recentobjectshook", &programs))
> + return;
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < programs->nr; i++) {
> + ret = run_one_gc_recent_objects_hook(&data->extra_recent_oids,
> + programs->items[i].string);
> + if (ret)
> + die(_("unable to enumerate additional recent objects"));
This error message to be exact.
> +test_expect_success 'gc.recentObjectsHook' '
> + git init repo &&
> + test_when_finished "rm -fr repo" &&
> + (
> + cd repo &&
> +
> + # Create a handful of objects.
> + #
> + # - one reachable commit, "base", designated for the reachable
> + # pack
> + # - one unreachable commit, "cruft.discard", which is marked
> + # for deletion
> + # - one unreachable commit, "cruft.old", which would be marked
> + # for deletion, but is rescued as an extra cruft tip
Perhaps we intended to drop "cruft tips" in the test comments too? e.g.
here and..
> +test_expect_success 'multi-valued gc.recentObjectsHook' '
> + git init repo &&
> + test_when_finished "rm -fr repo" &&
> + (
> + cd repo &&
> +
> + test_commit base &&
> + git branch -M main &&
> +
> + git checkout --orphan cruft.a &&
> + git rm -fr . &&
> + test_commit --no-tag cruft.a &&
> + cruft_a="$(git rev-parse HEAD)" &&
> +
> + git checkout --orphan cruft.b &&
> + git rm -fr . &&
> + test_commit --no-tag cruft.b &&
> + cruft_b="$(git rev-parse HEAD)" &&
> +
> + git checkout main &&
> + git branch -D cruft.a cruft.b &&
> + git reflog expire --all --expire=all &&
> +
> + echo "echo $cruft_a" | write_script extra-tips.a &&
> + echo "echo $cruft_b" | write_script extra-tips.b &&
> + echo "false" | write_script extra-tips.c &&
> +
> + git rev-list --objects --no-object-names $cruft_a $cruft_b \
> + >cruft.raw &&
> + sort cruft.raw >cruft.expect &&
> +
> + # ensure that each extra cruft tip is saved by its
here.
Aside from those trivial points, everything looks good.
