Re: [PATCH] rev-list: ignore replacements in the connectivity check

[Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im>]

On Mon, Nov 02, 2026 at 03:47:09PM +0000, Kristofer Karlsson via GitGitGadget wrote:
[snip]
> The t5413 test that expected the check to accept a commit whose
> original tree is incomplete because a replacement is complete now
> expects a rejection, and the test that disabled replacements
> explicitly to get one is redundant.

This here makes me pause a bit. Do we know whether this specific test
was introduced intentionally to make a specific edge case work?

> diff --git a/tree-verify.c b/tree-verify.c
> index 25db76d30b..c228235150 100644
> --- a/tree-verify.c
> +++ b/tree-verify.c
> @@ -133,7 +133,6 @@ static int verify_blob(struct repository *repo,
>  	vs->blobs_checked++;
>  	oi.typep = &type;
>  	if (odb_read_object_info_extended(repo->objects, oid, &oi,
> -					  OBJECT_INFO_LOOKUP_REPLACE |
>  					  OBJECT_INFO_SKIP_FETCH_OBJECT)) {
>  		if (vs->exclude_promisor_objects &&
>  		    is_promisor_object(repo, oid))
> @@ -163,7 +162,6 @@ static int read_tree_object(struct object_database *odb,
>  	oi.sizep = sizep;
>  	oi.contentp = bufp;
>  	if (odb_read_object_info_extended(odb, oid, &oi,
> -					  OBJECT_INFO_LOOKUP_REPLACE |
>  					  OBJECT_INFO_SKIP_FETCH_OBJECT))
>  		*bufp = NULL;
>  	if (*bufp && type != OBJ_TREE) {

Nit: this might have warranted a separate commit as it isn't even
related to the connectivity check, is it? Did you also vet all the other
sites that that verify objects?

Patrick