On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 10:58 AM, Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> wrote:
> Duy Nguyen <pclo...@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 12:45 AM, Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> wrote:
>>>>  How about this way instead: we keep track of where objects come from
>>>>  so we can verify object source when we create or update something
>>>>  that contains SHA-1.
>>>
>>> The overall approach taken by this series may be worth considering, but
>>> I do not think the check implemented here is correct.
>>>
>>> An object may be found in an alternate odb but we may also have our
>>> own copy of the same object.  You need to prove that a suspicious
>>> object is visible to us *ONLY* through add_submodule_odb().
>>
>> The way alt odbs are linked (new odbs area always at the end), if we
>> have the same copy, their copy will never be read (we check out alt
>> odbs from head to tail). So those duplicate suspicious objects are
>> actually invisible to us.
>
> The way I read find_pack_entry() is that our heuristics to start
> our search by looking at the pack in which we found an object the
> last time will invalidate your assumption above.  Am I mistaken?

No, you are right. Loose objects are always searched from the start of
alt odb list. Packs are searched till the end then back to head again.
-- 
Duy
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to