On Wed, Jun 01, 2022 at 09:09:35AM +0200, Claudio Jeker wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 01, 2022 at 08:44:43AM +0200, Theo Buehler wrote:
> > When compared to manifest FileAndHash, the RSC code doesn't limit
> > the size of the FileNameAndHash list. Should we do this for
> > consistency?
> >
> > The
On Wed, Jun 01, 2022 at 08:44:43AM +0200, Theo Buehler wrote:
> When compared to manifest FileAndHash, the RSC code doesn't limit the
> size of the FileNameAndHash list. Should we do this for consistency?
>
> The situation is of course not quite the same since we're in -f mode.
> However, we do
When compared to manifest FileAndHash, the RSC code doesn't limit the
size of the FileNameAndHash list. Should we do this for consistency?
The situation is of course not quite the same since we're in -f mode.
However, we do impose limits on the sizes of other resources, so it
looks like a missing
