Subject: Re: Memory leak with sparse-checkout

From: Taylor Blau <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2021 15:08:34 -0400

On Mon, Sep 20, 2021 at 01:27:25PM -0400, Derrick Stolee wrote:
> On 9/20/2021 1:25 PM, Derrick Stolee wrote:
> > On 9/20/2021 12:42 PM, Taylor Blau wrote:
> >> We would probably want to perform this check both during initialization,
> >> and when adding patterns in cone mode. It may also be worthwhile to
> >> check the validity of the cone before running 'list' or 'reapply', too.
> >
> > 'list' definitely seems like a good idea, since it is expecting different
> > output than the literal patterns when cone mode is enabled.
>
> I double-checked this to see how to fix this, and the 'list' subcommand
> already notices that the patterns are not in cone mode and reverts its
> behavior to writing all of the sparse-checkout file to stdout. It also
> writes warnings over stderr before that.
>
> There might not be anything pressing to do here.

Hmm. I think we'd probably want the same behavior for init and any other
commands which could potentially overwrite the contents of the
sparse-checkout file.

Those may already call list routines internally, in which case I agree
that this is already taken care of. But if not, then I think we should
match list's behavior in the new locations, too.

Thanks,
Taylor