On Mon, Oct 07, 2024 at 04:42:21PM +0800, shejialuo wrote: > On Mon, Oct 07, 2024 at 08:58:30AM +0200, Patrick Steinhardt wrote: > > On Sun, Sep 29, 2024 at 03:15:26PM +0800, shejialuo wrote: > > > We have already set up the infrastructure to check the consistency for > > > refs, but we do not support multiple worktrees. As we decide to add more > > > checks for ref content, we need to set up support for multiple > > > worktrees. Use "get_worktrees" and "get_worktree_ref_store" to check > > > refs under the worktrees. > > > > Makes sense. > > > > > Because we should only check once for "packed-refs", let's call the fsck > > > function for packed-backend when in the main worktree. In order to know > > > which directory we check, we should default print this information > > > instead of specifying "--verbose". > > > > This change should likely be evicted into its own commit with a bit more > > explanation. > > > > > It's not suitable to print these information to the stderr. So, change > > > to stdout. > > > > This one, too. Why exactly is in not suitable to print to stderr? > > > > I am sorry for the confusion. We should not print which directory we > check here into stderr. Because I think this will make test script > contain many unrelated info when using "git refs verify 2>err". > > The reason here is when checking the consistency of refs in multiple > worktrees. The ref name could be repeat. For example, worktree A > has its own ref called "test" under ".git/worktrees/A/refs/worktree/test" > and worktree B has its own ref still called "test" under > ".git/worktrees/B/refs/worktree/test". > > However, the refname would be printed to "refs/worktree/test". It will > make the user confused which "refs/worktree/test" is checked. So, we > should print this information like: > > Checking references consistency in .git > ... > checking references consistency in .git/worktrees/A > ... > checking references consistency in .git/worktrees/B > > However, when writing this, I feel a ".git" is a bad usage. It will make > the user think it will check everything here. This should be improved in > the next version. But wouldn't it be the better solution if we printed the fully-qualified reference name "worktrees/worktree/refs/worktree/test" instead? That would remove the need to say which directory we're currently verifying in the first place. Patrick
