From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from fout-a5-smtp.messagingengine.com (fout-a5-smtp.messagingengine.com [103.168.172.148]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 60D2C2248B9 for ; Fri, 24 Jan 2025 20:18:58 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=103.168.172.148 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1737749941; cv=none; b=Jp1kVsw/feOX5J7ibIBFmhGq0DiPs7nidrAejuQahEg4Eq42trEMaC16n5BpKi9or4WVSJLjYMrg1OWPY+2h3g/WBlJo6PU70I6AkZVOVpz5Wo4Zye2/MEImk/gBZhGwQbv760ty6MYHJT8zk3P5/VRgQH4Hl469RyTPvMedNuY= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1737749941; c=relaxed/simple; bh=5BqF8opRBPyjFwRGvL76MQPFcEsz6QSdwOMiVuaqjW4=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=nbEFJwDYnpOjz9owT+NFyKJo/6Ff2yLVydWviXEOdV/Y3DRljL9tgMbI68vG2yESG/+oZnpd8ybiGkmAoUCWfqAgTE50JttBYu1o8hlSuHYBnoK1AmCxz9Q/9d25d7PmdbLoZhHNaHAe4s68SYNAEU0w55ji/ujJxkvjDcuKb+U= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=pobox.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pobox.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b=GBfd34OX; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b=UXW6VkSy; arc=none smtp.client-ip=103.168.172.148 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=pobox.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pobox.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b="GBfd34OX"; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b="UXW6VkSy" Received: from phl-compute-09.internal (phl-compute-09.phl.internal [10.202.2.49]) by mailfout.phl.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A28513801E9; Fri, 24 Jan 2025 15:18:57 -0500 (EST) Received: from phl-frontend-02 ([10.202.2.161]) by phl-compute-09.internal (MEProxy); Fri, 24 Jan 2025 15:18:57 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=cc :cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type:content-type:date :date:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :references:reply-to:subject:subject:to:to; s=fm2; t=1737749937; x=1737836337; bh=g9mSeBK3QeVTnsN4zUa+sue2+Xp2hfpTuITCp7EXhe0=; b= GBfd34OXIZ5XpojA7kqqMDIiIUF7Y6oBN6QlolXlKONhP5uFzTj1V1rrbzB+TlX1 ROTJwcnyaKuNUiYi+cty5eb0UuFQShSEiBRiA5j4Cw9+mNK5C/eGkEDOMnqOeUKQ +4i/T4VHtePajVeIhkmleE/2hiXYEBtGTFwhljQTq7XX+L0OvoiRNt39HCZOtkd/ 8FNtbrWI62vtRoHhOYnqa9NRxXzSv6FAyScLH9h+fjnq1vAhPBG9CuhWFnTuWgeb P8yMF8m8dCUO6SDLVW0atV3zC31RoaXmo4YkSzAl1QQ2po/5eh3YBbTcXlbzWV6n 1jXBW5s/fMH0gs6+Swd+7g== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-transfer-encoding :content-type:content-type:date:date:feedback-id:feedback-id :from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :references:reply-to:subject:subject:to:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; t=1737749937; x= 1737836337; bh=g9mSeBK3QeVTnsN4zUa+sue2+Xp2hfpTuITCp7EXhe0=; b=U XW6VkSyACTHYLYEBZyAb9pLP2ZUBhUx8rtT3rTQ3WNhy+M5cqpsGx6OZL7DwGCYx aMKAMys6xg0No904vewyLoZqQIXtqhYEyj1gZspoW/FDkJOO7QZyVuyto34adZ7i q13j9jt8b3Pzef6t1oxIF9AtHKFX1LTV7pVJfZ6YXh4nXOZv5YgmjaFyx6f95q6g vcrioalKlaBWAL9tUXIm9trLiVoVHnR+w7jLDd3NDjtv+Uvl55rOYY6RlKd2jBxs gwf1+rlogBXvXCY39AQlfD/ezPFJULlCS9F+gMjnoJN5fppRWAjQY0fpwYwS+4Ix qVHW2LGHZUyHMFRXGBozA== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeefuddrudejgedgheeghecutefuodetggdotefrod ftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpggftfghnshhusghstghrihgsvgdp uffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecunecujfgurhephffvve fujghffffkfgggtgfgsehtkeertddtreejnecuhfhrohhmpefluhhnihhoucevucfjrghm rghnohcuoehgihhtshhtvghrsehpohgsohigrdgtohhmqeenucggtffrrghtthgvrhhnpe dtffdvteegvddtkeetfeevueevlefgkeefheeigfehveehvdekheelveevfedtheenucev lhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehgihhtshhtvg hrsehpohgsohigrdgtohhmpdhnsggprhgtphhtthhopeefpdhmohguvgepshhmthhpohhu thdprhgtphhtthhopehpvghrvgiirdgrrhhonhesghhmrghilhdrtghomhdprhgtphhtth hopehgihhtsehvghgvrhdrkhgvrhhnvghlrdhorhhgpdhrtghpthhtohepghhithhsthgv rhesphhosghogidrtghomh X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: if26b431b:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Fri, 24 Jan 2025 15:18:56 -0500 (EST) From: Junio C Hamano To: Perez-Lopez =?utf-8?Q?=C3=81ron?= Ricardo Cc: git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Bug report: parallel fetch tries to unlock SSH keys over and over again In-Reply-To: ("Perez-Lopez =?utf-8?Q?=C3=81ron?= Ricardo"'s message of "Fri, 24 Jan 2025 11:46:58 -0800") References: Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2025 12:18:55 -0800 Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Perez-Lopez Áron Ricardo writes: > What did you do before the bug happened? (Steps to reproduce your issue) > git fetch --all --tags --prune --jobs=10 > > What did you expect to happen? (Expected behavior) > Being asked for the password of my SSH key, then git updating all of > the remotes. > > What happened instead? (Actual behavior) > I get asked for my SSH key many times over, and the fetch does not succeed. It is hard to tell without seeing how many repositories the above "--all" expands to (but I'd assume it is way more than 10), if they share the same credentials or going to different site that requires different SSH keys but these keys share the same passphrase, etc. Assuming that they all go to the same host that wants the same SSH keys, and assuming that you are using ssh agent, if the symptom were the fetch *does* succeed, but being asked for the passphrase to unlock the same key number of times, then I can sort of see why it would be problematic and why it might help to wait for the first connection to successfully open before starting the other 9 jobs as you instructed "git fetch" to spawn. But if the symptom is that the fetch does *not* succeed [*], a simpler explanation of the symptom may be that the passphrase given was simply misspelt and/or there is no ssh agent involved that loads the passphrases and caches them on demand. FWIW, I push over openssh connection to many sites, but as far as I know, I need to say "ssh-add" to tell the agent what keys should be cached and what their passphrases are *well* *before* I initiate anything that requires ssh connections like "git push". Sorry that my response is not an answer, but I have never dealt with a SSH setting where the AddKeysToAgent directive is active. Others may have better ideas, but I wonder what good would "wait for the first one" do, as a general "fix". Git does not even know what relationship the underlying SSH connections to these other 9 repositories would have to the connection to the site that hosts the first repository, and the first one might happen to be hosted at a site using a completely unrelated SSH key from the rest, in which case it simply is wasting time to make the other 9 wait. [footnote] * ... and since the command line is using "--all", what does it really mean that it does *not* succeed? Some fetches but some others don't?