All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Cc: Rene Scharfe <rene.scharfe@lsrfire.ath.cx>,
	git@vger.kernel.org, Konstantin Ryabitsev <mricon@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: "git archve --format=tar" output changed from 1.8.1 to 1.8.2.1
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2013 18:41:03 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130131174103.GA20111@kroah.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7vzjzpgswz.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>

On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 09:32:12AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> writes:
> 
> > The way we upload the Linux kernel to kernel.org involves creating a tar
> > archive, signing the archive, and then just uploading the signature.
> > The server then checks out the repo based on the tag, generates the tar
> > archive and checks the signature to make sure they match.
> > 
> > A few days ago I released the 3.0.61 kernel, and it turned out that I
> > couldn't upload the kernel release because 'git archive' now creates a
> > binary file that differs from an older version of git.
> > ...
> > Now keeping binary compatibility of tar archive files isn't really a big
> > deal, but, the commit to git that causes this seems a bit odd, is it
> > really needed?  Or can we just fix the version of tar with NetBSD
> > instead?  :)
> >
> > Any ideas?
> 
> How about fixing kup to teach the "let's cheat and let the other end
> run 'git archive', if the resulting archive and GPG signature
> locally created does match, we do not have to transfer the tarball
> itself" trick a fall-back mode that says "but if the signature does
> not match, then transfer the bulk used to create the signature to
> the remote anyway".  This fallback can and should of course be
> useful for the compressed patch transfer.

Ugh, uploading a 431Mb file, over a flaky wireless connection (I end up
doing lots of kernel releases while traveling), would be a horrible
change.  I'd rather just keep using the same older version of git that
kernel.org is running instead.

thanks,

greg k-h

  reply	other threads:[~2013-01-31 17:39 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-01-31 17:28 "git archve --format=tar" output changed from 1.8.1 to 1.8.2.1 Greg KH
2013-01-31 17:32 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-01-31 17:41   ` Greg KH [this message]
2013-01-31 17:52     ` Konstantin Ryabitsev
2013-02-04  0:48       ` Greg KH
2013-01-31 18:16     ` Junio C Hamano
2013-02-04  0:45       ` Greg KH
2013-02-04  5:05         ` Junio C Hamano
2013-02-04 18:26           ` Greg KH
2013-01-31 18:33 ` René Scharfe
2013-02-04  0:42   ` Greg KH

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20130131174103.GA20111@kroah.com \
    --to=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=gitster@pobox.com \
    --cc=mricon@kernel.org \
    --cc=rene.scharfe@lsrfire.ath.cx \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.