From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andreas Ericsson Subject: Re: Cloning from sites with 404 overridden Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2006 14:36:32 +0100 Message-ID: <442152E0.4020604@op5.se> References: <20060322025921.1722.qmail@science.horizon.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Mar 22 14:37:13 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FM3Vt-0006WP-0K for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Wed, 22 Mar 2006 14:36:37 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751239AbWCVNge (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Mar 2006 08:36:34 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751241AbWCVNge (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Mar 2006 08:36:34 -0500 Received: from linux-server1.op5.se ([193.201.96.2]:53181 "EHLO smtp-gw1.op5.se") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751239AbWCVNge (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Mar 2006 08:36:34 -0500 Received: from [172.25.1.201] (unknown [62.119.65.226]) by smtp-gw1.op5.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFDC06BD03; Wed, 22 Mar 2006 14:36:32 +0100 (CET) User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7-1.1.fc4 (X11/20050929) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en To: linux@horizon.com In-Reply-To: <20060322025921.1722.qmail@science.horizon.com> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: linux@horizon.com wrote: > If someone feels ambitious, you can detect this condition automatically > by searching for a file that you know won't be there and seeing if you > get a 404 response to that. > > To avoid punishing good servers, it would be nice to defer the test > until reciving the first corrupted object. > > I'm not sure what the best "object that's not supposed to be there" is. .git/objects/00/hoping-for-a-404-or-webadmin-should-fix It has the right number of chars so it should fit in wherever a real object name does but is obviously bogus anyways. > It could just be a random hash, or would a malformed object file name > be better? A malformed object name is infinitely better. Otherwise we'd end up with a wild guess that hits home some day, to much surprise and a bug-report I wouldn't want to track. Not to mention the embarrassment when explaining why that object-name was chosen. > > (As an aside, I suspect this is all caused by Microsoft's "friendly HTML > error messages" invention.) The body of the 404-page has absolutely nothing to do with it. -- Andreas Ericsson andreas.ericsson@op5.se OP5 AB www.op5.se Tel: +46 8-230225 Fax: +46 8-230231