Re: [PATCH v2] commit-graph: disable GIT_COMMIT_GRAPH_PARANOIA by default

[Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1565 bytes --]

On Thu, Nov 23, 2023 at 08:44:33PM +0900, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im> writes:
> 
> > Note that this requires us to amend some tests to manually turn on the
> > paranoid checks again. This is because we cause repository corruption by
> > manually deleting objects which are part of the commit graph already.
> > These circumstances shouldn't usually happen in repositories.
> > ...
> > diff --git a/t/t6022-rev-list-missing.sh b/t/t6022-rev-list-missing.sh
> > index 40265a4f66..1ca4eb5a36 100755
> > --- a/t/t6022-rev-list-missing.sh
> > +++ b/t/t6022-rev-list-missing.sh
> > @@ -13,6 +13,11 @@ test_expect_success 'create repository and alternate directory' '
> >  	test_commit 3
> >  '
> >  
> > +# We manually corrupt the repository, which means that the commit-graph may
> > +# contain references to already-deleted objects. We thus need to enable
> > +# commit-graph paranoia to not returned these deleted commits from the graph.
> > +export GIT_COMMIT_GRAPH_PARANOIA=true
> 
> test-lint-shell-syntax is a bit overly strict and complains against
> this line, so until it is loosened, I'd suggest to do
> 
> 	GIT_COMMIT_GRAPH_PARANOIA=true
> 	export GIT_COMMIT_GRAPH_PARANOIA
> 
> instead here.

Fair. I was pondering whether to do this when writing this line, but
remembering the recent discussion about it being in POSIX [1] I didn't.
Didn't know though we had a linting rule for this, so I'll send a v3 to
split up the statement.

Patrick

[1]: <87430c6c-91c0-4be1-b89d-bf442b3f018b@gmail.com>

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]