Hi Ævar,

just a general note: this patch, which is the first of v4, is marked as
replying to the cover letter of v3. That feels quite odd. If you use
threading, why not let it reply to the cover letter of the same patch
series iteration?

In other words, would you mind using the `--thread=shallow` option in the
future, for better structuring on the mailing list?

Thanks,
Johannes

On Tue, 16 Mar 2021, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:

> Add the object_name member to the initialization macro. This was
> omitted in 7b35efd734e (fsck_walk(): optionally name objects on the
> go, 2016-07-17) when the field was added.
>
> Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
> ---
>  fsck.h | 4 ++--
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fsck.h b/fsck.h
> index 733378f126..2274843ba0 100644
> --- a/fsck.h
> +++ b/fsck.h
> @@ -43,8 +43,8 @@ struct fsck_options {
>  	kh_oid_map_t *object_names;
>  };
>
> -#define FSCK_OPTIONS_DEFAULT { NULL, fsck_error_function, 0, NULL, OIDSET_INIT }
> -#define FSCK_OPTIONS_STRICT { NULL, fsck_error_function, 1, NULL, OIDSET_INIT }
> +#define FSCK_OPTIONS_DEFAULT { NULL, fsck_error_function, 0, NULL, OIDSET_INIT, NULL }
> +#define FSCK_OPTIONS_STRICT { NULL, fsck_error_function, 1, NULL, OIDSET_INIT, NULL }
>
>  /* descend in all linked child objects
>   * the return value is:
> --
> 2.31.0.260.g719c683c1d
>
>