Message ID | 20200729231428.3658647-1-sandals@crustytoothpaste.net (mailing list archive) |
---|---|
Headers | show |
Series | SHA-256, part 3/3 | expand |
On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 7:15 PM brian m. carlson <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net> wrote: > Changes from v5: > * Remove useless test_oid_init invocations throughout the series. > * Fix a commit message for grammar and style. > * Fix a typo in a shell case statement. > * Fix http-fetch to allow parsing options before failing on a missing > git directory. Thanks, I think this version addresses all the comments from my reviews of the last several versions of this patch series. I've read through the entire series a couple times and paid close attention to the range-diffs, so FWIW, I'm reasonably comfortable giving v6 my: Reviewed-by: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com> writes: > On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 7:15 PM brian m. carlson > <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net> wrote: >> Changes from v5: >> * Remove useless test_oid_init invocations throughout the series. >> * Fix a commit message for grammar and style. >> * Fix a typo in a shell case statement. >> * Fix http-fetch to allow parsing options before failing on a missing >> git directory. > > Thanks, I think this version addresses all the comments from my > reviews of the last several versions of this patch series. > > I've read through the entire series a couple times and paid close > attention to the range-diffs, so FWIW, I'm reasonably comfortable > giving v6 my: > > Reviewed-by: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com> Thanks, both.
[I couldn't find a more relevant thing to reply to]
On Thu, Jul 30 2020, brian m. carlson wrote:
> [...]
B.t.w. thanks again for all your work on SHA-1 -> SHA-256.
I found a missing spot that wasn't trivial to fix, so sending an E-Mail:
In git-filter-branch.sh we have:
_x40='[0-9a-f][0-9a-f][0-9a-f][0-9a-f][0-9a-f]'
_x40="$_x40$_x40$_x40$_x40$_x40$_x40$_x40$_x40"
Then later we have a case condition based on matching a SHA-1:
$_x40)
echo "Ref '$ref' was rewritten"
if ! git update-ref -m "filter-branch: rewrite" \
Just deleting that case arm has filter-branch tests passing, so whatever
it's meant to do it has zero coverage, which explains why it hasn't
broken with our tests.
I didn't have time to dig, so sending off this E-Mail instead.
On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 4:04 AM Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com> wrote: > > [I couldn't find a more relevant thing to reply to] > > On Thu, Jul 30 2020, brian m. carlson wrote: > > > [...] > > B.t.w. thanks again for all your work on SHA-1 -> SHA-256. > > I found a missing spot that wasn't trivial to fix, so sending an E-Mail: > > In git-filter-branch.sh we have: > > _x40='[0-9a-f][0-9a-f][0-9a-f][0-9a-f][0-9a-f]' > _x40="$_x40$_x40$_x40$_x40$_x40$_x40$_x40$_x40" > > Then later we have a case condition based on matching a SHA-1: > > $_x40) > echo "Ref '$ref' was rewritten" > if ! git update-ref -m "filter-branch: rewrite" \ > > Just deleting that case arm has filter-branch tests passing, so whatever > it's meant to do it has zero coverage, which explains why it hasn't > broken with our tests. > > I didn't have time to dig, so sending off this E-Mail instead. Hmm, perhaps we should revive the "separate non-core tools out of git.git" thread -- https://lore.kernel.org/git/a784a61e-1320-be1e-9dfb-d533a01827ec@gmail.com/. Honestly not sure it's worth bothering fixing filter-branch at this point, given the strong WARNINGs we added to it. If anything, I'd just add another warning to the pile for this issue. If folks really still want/need filter-branch once SHA-256 is the only option, I'm sure they'll be motivated to make the necessary fixes (or just use/fix filter-repo's filter-branch-ish).
On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 08:36:15AM -0800, Elijah Newren wrote: > Honestly not sure it's worth bothering fixing filter-branch at this > point, given the strong WARNINGs we added to it. If anything, I'd > just add another warning to the pile for this issue. If folks really > still want/need filter-branch once SHA-256 is the only option, I'm > sure they'll be motivated to make the necessary fixes (or just use/fix > filter-repo's filter-branch-ish). You're probably right that it's not a good use of time, but I just sent a series fixing it. It was one of those cases where I was like "oh, it's probably just X". And then "no, wait...", and before I knew it I had wasted an hour fixing filter-branch. ;) -Peff