From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from fout-a8-smtp.messagingengine.com (fout-a8-smtp.messagingengine.com [103.168.172.151]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 97633207A16 for ; Wed, 12 Feb 2025 09:56:57 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=103.168.172.151 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1739354219; cv=none; b=PvXUCQ40o+enMg71IZyQ3nYsgZpwxo3kv9Jx0sNG1b3uWjVY2GuZwdgf09ZZ5tKgcW4OxzKZNi8Vfj2sLLGx15pfdCmhcbbmmHNgpPPY4h0wU35EKFrswAINhfzwP/c+1ZYdlXzrTHfiWmur/ScbJ1YBDvecJSH67h24GUrdKVc= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1739354219; c=relaxed/simple; bh=r0lvXKSVzca4U02rREeyvOV6XkPUvBzKTx03wogaiJk=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=OVeD0+JLPonImU39V2URaOu6ajcNlSuRaQHoBqIo5DTP/KkVfA6Z6S9fJE3OhXIv+rK6kMilQkeI8qQw3s2r1g0sqkzscGlGmz8458tQB7ynH+FcTxHGxrFtKam7TbXt//luRSQkoDikux+HvMVzT52LAP2FlEoglE3fTsMPPiM= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=pks.im; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pks.im; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=pks.im header.i=@pks.im header.b=qPQpbCTn; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b=tTLdlm8s; arc=none smtp.client-ip=103.168.172.151 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=pks.im Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pks.im Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=pks.im header.i=@pks.im header.b="qPQpbCTn"; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b="tTLdlm8s" Received: from phl-compute-10.internal (phl-compute-10.phl.internal [10.202.2.50]) by mailfout.phl.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C7B81380983; Wed, 12 Feb 2025 04:56:56 -0500 (EST) Received: from phl-mailfrontend-01 ([10.202.2.162]) by phl-compute-10.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 12 Feb 2025 04:56:56 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=pks.im; h=cc:cc :content-type:content-type:date:date:from:from:in-reply-to :in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject :subject:to:to; s=fm3; t=1739354216; x=1739440616; bh=cRDxnNvR5p F0GYYOf54qln2nHRJlqPY5L+UN+N/5UOw=; b=qPQpbCTn8nVXz0aO1o0qN9bL+H atTH9gm+HGlZu/ehNBLrWR9Ie6Vh+7rykMsxlFOYxcKpmvKurZxCb4ZXb+e0RzzZ 7uCqDb6gsE5OlGbizUp1t8rtE3+KdCXvH+xK1r9y/puVxGWoHhVQD7G9aPAnfAr2 LtgmiqLkwdFPfhGgXcWmsEYMM1B9gx7xjEHlECgr8Tf1iI7/HYMNxT5aMFmxDkri q2yYA/6OOeeOO+oFP4nr0O/PWRsnABcJTqcuA43StaJsjeeWbfRVLEmCuJ/oFA5u juBL8otPMTNpsqn0pkNEgnx/DTDxBik0yI0eajnbkvF97Xe7ug7PWF8kPdow== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-type:content-type:date:date :feedback-id:feedback-id:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject:subject:to :to:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; t= 1739354216; x=1739440616; bh=cRDxnNvR5pF0GYYOf54qln2nHRJlqPY5L+U N+N/5UOw=; b=tTLdlm8s5MTNUZGxmxYqoIxNzA26IMIjhH2SohxJQ0VeAbDrxBI 79wfddSOTbYRHI2hahuqebzN5Hh1f71CLI9xbfdXsFWGgOvIDI4pt4SSLRI3O9MV kt3agSLTSH2KgmtnvYZyE2oxCpVleaBedKU4ybaEQCsYOziACsg7laWcc/9I/U3Z fhzRVBSnVkFvAN3fT8COezMDVyJAodo5kW4xP6tyhBiNqwTrH5cPKqKrwi3reZly Gjl889xfvQticSslNxJaGY/QxsF03uTFcGnLhNacMmh0hOjVNtI2b6PjyF7fjyQs t1ZNy2TviGjbLf6uZZNCUJM1Ps0UjQqtgFw== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeefvddrtddtgdegfeehkecutefuodetggdotefrod ftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpggftfghnshhusghstghrihgsvgdp uffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivg hnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenucfjughrpeffhffvvefukfhfgggtuggjsehttdertddttddv necuhfhrohhmpefrrghtrhhitghkucfuthgvihhnhhgrrhguthcuoehpshesphhkshdrih hmqeenucggtffrrghtthgvrhhnpeevkeekfffhiedtleduiefgjedttedvledvudehgfeu gedugffhueekhfejvdektdenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmh grihhlfhhrohhmpehpshesphhkshdrihhmpdhnsggprhgtphhtthhopeehpdhmohguvgep shhmthhpohhuthdprhgtphhtthhopehmhhgrghhgvghrsegrlhhumhdrmhhithdrvgguuh dprhgtphhtthhopehgihhtsehvghgvrhdrkhgvrhhnvghlrdhorhhgpdhrtghpthhtohep khgrrhhthhhikhdrudekkeesghhmrghilhdrtghomhdprhgtphhtthhopehshhgvjhhirg hluhhosehgmhgrihhlrdgtohhmpdhrtghpthhtohepghhithhsthgvrhesphhosghogidr tghomh X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: i197146af:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Wed, 12 Feb 2025 04:56:55 -0500 (EST) Received: by vm-mail (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTPSA id 9ebfaa69 (TLSv1.3:TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256:NO); Wed, 12 Feb 2025 09:56:54 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2025 10:56:53 +0100 From: Patrick Steinhardt To: shejialuo Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Karthik Nayak , Junio C Hamano , Michael Haggerty Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 8/8] builtin/fsck: add `git refs verify` child process Message-ID: References: Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: 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] [...] > + [--[no-]name-objects] [--[no-]references] [...] > > 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. It would also be nice to have a couple of tests to verify that the flag does what it is intended to do. Patrick