On Wed, Jun 01, 2022 at 09:09:35AM +0200, Claudio Jeker wrote: > On Wed, Jun 01, 2022 at 08:44:43AM +0200, Theo Buehler wrote: > > When compared to manifest FileAndHash, the RSC code doesn't limit > > the size of the FileNameAndHash list. Should we do this for > > consistency? > > > > The situation is of course not quite the same since we're in -f > > mode. However, we do impose limits on the sizes of other resources, > > so it looks like a missing check. > > This is fine with me but lets get job@'s opinion since he is behind rsc > support.
The proposed changeset aligns with the defensive pattern to box everything in, which (until operational experience tells us otherwise) probably is a good thing. OK job@
