From 01f8d5948a7f370c42d9fe2deb724139a1bfcb7b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Jeff King Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2019 03:40:34 -0500 Subject: prefer "hash mismatch" to "sha1 mismatch" To future-proof ourselves against a change in the hash, let's use the more generic "hash mismatch" to refer to integrity problems. Note that we do advertise this exact string in git-fsck(1). However, the message itself is marked for translation, meaning we do not expect it to be machine-readable. While we're touching that documentation, let's also update it for grammar and clarity. Signed-off-by: Jeff King Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano --- Documentation/git-fsck.txt | 6 +++--- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) (limited to 'Documentation') diff --git a/Documentation/git-fsck.txt b/Documentation/git-fsck.txt index ab9a93fb9b..55950d9eea 100644 --- a/Documentation/git-fsck.txt +++ b/Documentation/git-fsck.txt @@ -140,9 +140,9 @@ dangling :: The object , is present in the database but never 'directly' used. A dangling commit could be a root node. -sha1 mismatch :: - The database has an object who's sha1 doesn't match the - database value. +hash mismatch :: + The database has an object whose hash doesn't match the + object database value. This indicates a serious data integrity problem. Environment Variables -- cgit v1.3