Re: [PATCH GSoC v18 11/13] cat-file: add remote-object-info to batch-command

quoted

+static void parse_cmd_remote_object_info(struct batch_options *opt,
+					 const char *line, struct strbuf *output,
+					 struct expand_data *data)
+{
+	int count;
+	const char **argv;
+	char *line_to_split;
+	struct object_info *remote_object_info = NULL;
+	struct oid_array object_info_oids = OID_ARRAY_INIT;
+
+	if (strlen(line) >= MAX_REMOTE_OBJ_INFO_LINE)
+		die(_("remote-object-info command too long"));
+
+	line_to_split = xstrdup(line);
+	count = split_cmdline(line_to_split, &argv);
+	if (count < 0)
+		die(_("remote-object-info: %s"), split_cmdline_strerror(count));
+	if (count - 1 > MAX_ALLOWED_OBJ_LIMIT)
+		die(_("remote-object-info supports at most %d objects"),
+		    MAX_ALLOWED_OBJ_LIMIT);
+
+	if (get_remote_info(opt, count, argv, &remote_object_info,
+			    &object_info_oids))
+		goto cleanup;

Since this function does not return a value, the caller cannot
even tell if there was an error if we just silently return like
this.  Is it really OK to silently ignore such a failure?  Should
we not die() loudly to report it instead?

True, this comes from the v11 before I got into, I think Eric tried to do
something like what 'info' does (it doesn't die) prints "<oid> missing"
but this comes from failing fetching.

'remote-object-info' prints "<oid> missing" when the fetching works but
the oid is unrecognized.

I will add a die instead of the goto. Thanks.

Thanks.

Regards,
Pablo