From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Johannes Sixt Subject: Re: grafts+repack+prune = history at danger Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2007 09:13:02 +0100 Organization: eudaptics software gmbh Message-ID: <45B9B80E.E2534F97@eudaptics.com> References: <45B8E61E.C9C5E6C6@eudaptics.com> <7vireu7lj0.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Jan 26 09:12:00 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1HAMBj-0000ux-Rh for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Fri, 26 Jan 2007 09:12:00 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1030813AbXAZILs (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 Jan 2007 03:11:48 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1030815AbXAZILs (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 Jan 2007 03:11:48 -0500 Received: from cm56-163-160.liwest.at ([86.56.163.160]:16949 "EHLO linz.eudaptics.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1030814AbXAZILr (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 Jan 2007 03:11:47 -0500 Received: from eudaptics.com (tethys.linz.eudaptics [192.168.1.88]) by linz.eudaptics.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ACCF86D9; Fri, 26 Jan 2007 09:11:45 +0100 (CET) X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Junio C Hamano wrote: > > Johannes Sixt writes: > > > Isn't there a major hole in the logic how repack works when grafts are > > in effect? > > > > I did this (details follow): > > > > 1. specify grafts > > 2. repack > > 3. prune > > 4. clone > > > > Result: Broken history in the clone; info/grafts was not copied. > > That is expected. > > If you had problem in the original repository (i.e. the one with > grafts) that lost objects after step 3., that would be serious > and needs to be fixed, Oh, the original repo *does* loose the object after step 3, but you would not notice it until you remove the grafts file. > grafts are local matter for archaeologist's convenience to glue > two independent histories together, and not much more. Agreed. Then grafts must be disregarded by (almost) all plumbing, most notably fsck-objects, prune, pack-objects, but also {fetch,upload,send,receive}-pack. They should be obeyed only by the log and diff families and certainly also rev-list on request. -- Hannes