On Wednesday 06 November 2013 10:00:57 Junio C Hamano wrote:
Thanks; first some procedural issues:
Thanks, I will take care of the mentioned points for future submissions.
I think the real problem is that sha1_loose_object_info() is called
by sha1_object_info_extended(), when it does not find a cached or a
packed object, and the callee assumes that it is asked to fill in
only the requested pieces of information while the caller does not
even bother to check if such an object actually exists.
How about doing it like the attached instead?
Yes; this seems more like a proper fix. I would prefer it over my suggestion.
It is illogical that sha1_loose_object_info sometimes returns an error if the
object does not exist and sometimes not, depending on which properties are
requested.
Sven