Re: [PATCH 1/2] prepare_packed_git(): refactor garbage reporting in pack directory

[Doug Kelly <dougk.ff7@gmail.com>]

On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 1:35 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
> Doug Kelly <dougk.ff7@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> I think the patches I sent (a bit prematurely) address the
>> remaining comments... I did find there was a relevant test in
>> t5304 already, so I added a new test in the same section (and
>> cleaned up some of the garbage it wasn't removing before).  I'm
>> not sure if it's poor form to move tests around like this, but I
>> figured it might be best to keep them logically grouped.
>
> OK, will queue as I didn't spot anything glaringly wrong ;-)
>
> I did wonder if we want to say anything about .bitmap files, though.
> If there is one without matching .idx and .pack, shouldn't we report
> just like we report .idx without .pack (or vice versa)?
>
> Thanks.

I think you're right -- this would be something worth following up on.
At least, t5304 doesn't cover this case explicitly, but when I tried
adding an empty bitmap with a bogus name, I did see a "no
corresponding .idx or .pack" error, similar to the stale .keep file.

I'd trust your (and Jeff's) knowledge on this far more than my own,
but would it be a bad idea to clean up .keep and .bitmap files if the
.idx/.pack pair are missing?  I think we may have had a discussion
previously on how things along these lines might be racey -- but I
don't know what order the .keep file is created in relation to the
.idx/.pack.