Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/2] rev-list: print additional missing object information

From: Junio C Hamano <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 05 Feb 2025 10:29:53 -0800

Justin Tobler <[email-masked]> writes:

> wouldn't be sufficient to determine where each record would end. Using
> two NUL bytes next to each other to mark the end of a record would work
> though.

I think we already use that convention elsewhere, and that is why I
brought it up as a potential approach to take.