On Tue, May 06, 2025 at 12:14:59PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > shejialuo <shejialuo@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > In "load_contents", when the "packed-refs" is empty, we will just return > > the snapshot. However, we would report an error to the user when > > checking the consistency of the empty "packed-refs". > > Neither the commit title nor the above paragraph hints that this is > talking about "fsck" part of the packed-refs subsystem. That leaves > the readers confused when they read "with the runtime behavior" > below. > That's right. My message is vague. > > We should align with the runtime behavior. As what "load_contents" does, > > let's check whether the file size is zero and if so, we will skip > > checking the consistency and simply return. > > How about > > During fsck, an empty "packed-refs" file gives an error; > this is unwarranted. We should instead just return an empty > "snapshot" and let the caller happily declare success, just > like the code paths that implement the runtime use of the > file do. > > or something? > > As to the title > > packed-backend: fsck should allow an empty packed-refs file > > is shorter and clearer, I would think. > Thanks, I will improve this in the next version. > The code change is trivially correct, I think. Nicely found.
