On Wed, Feb 12, 2025 at 10:56:53AM +0100, Patrick Steinhardt wrote: > On Thu, Feb 06, 2025 at 02:00:07PM +0800, shejialuo wrote: > > diff --git a/Documentation/git-fsck.txt b/Documentation/git-fsck.txt > > index 5b82e4605c..9bd433028f 100644 > > --- a/Documentation/git-fsck.txt > > +++ b/Documentation/git-fsck.txt > > @@ -12,7 +12,7 @@ SYNOPSIS > > 'git fsck' [--tags] [--root] [--unreachable] [--cache] [--no-reflogs] > > [--[no-]full] [--strict] [--verbose] [--lost-found] > > [--[no-]dangling] [--[no-]progress] [--connectivity-only] > > - [--[no-]name-objects] [<object>...] > > + [--[no-]name-objects] [--[no-]references] [<object>...] > > > > DESCRIPTION > > ----------- > > @@ -104,6 +104,10 @@ care about this output and want to speed it up further. > > progress status even if the standard error stream is not > > directed to a terminal. > > > > +--[no-]references:: > > + Control whether to check the references database consistency > > + via 'git refs verify'. See linkgit:git-refs[1] for details. > > I think we should note the default, which is to check them. > OK, let me improve the documentation in the next version. > It would also be nice to have a couple of tests to verify that the flag > does what it is intended to do. > Good idea, we could test via trailing contents to do this. Let me improve this. > Patrick
