From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stephen Rothwell Subject: Re: bug in git-fsck-cache? Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2005 12:02:26 +1000 Message-ID: <20050901120226.54547107.git@ozlabs.org> References: <20050831161529.327a7957.git@ozlabs.org> <7v4q959857.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 X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Sep 01 04:03:39 2005 Return-path: Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EAePc-0001cc-Jt for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Thu, 01 Sep 2005 04:02:44 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965022AbVIACCS (ORCPT ); Wed, 31 Aug 2005 22:02:18 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S965029AbVIACCS (ORCPT ); Wed, 31 Aug 2005 22:02:18 -0400 Received: from ozlabs.org ([203.10.76.45]:56729 "EHLO ozlabs.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965022AbVIACCS (ORCPT ); Wed, 31 Aug 2005 22:02:18 -0400 Received: from oak (ta-1-1.tip.net.au [203.11.71.1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EBD5E681E0; Thu, 1 Sep 2005 12:02:16 +1000 (EST) To: Junio C Hamano In-Reply-To: <7v4q959857.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 1.0.5 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i486-pc-linux-gnu) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Wed, 31 Aug 2005 13:13:56 -0700 Junio C Hamano wrote: > > Stephen Rothwell writes: > > > The commit c594adad5653491813959277fb87a2fef54c4e05 is shown as > > "connected" (in Linus' tree, not one of my patches) by gitk, so I am happy > > that git prune did not get rid of it, but why does fsck-cache report it as > > dangling? > > Hmph. You ran fsck-cache by hand without --full (i.e. you told > it not to worry about objects already in packs); 'git prune' > runs it with '--full' to do the full connectivity analysis. I > think that's where the difference comes from. ok, with '--full' nothing gets reported as dangling. That commit is not in a pack, but is in an object directory referenced through objects/info/alternates. > Is that commit reachable from any of the refs hanging under your > $GIT_DIR/refs/? For example, do you have the Linus tip of the > master branch in $GIT_DIR/refs/heads/origin? yes, master == origin and that commit is reachable from master according to gitk. > If an object is already in a pack and later became unreachable > from any of your refs, there is no way to remove that object > from the pack, so dangling commits in a pack will be left > dangling even after 'git prune'. It is still reachable as fsck-cache --full shows (I guess). Cheers, Stephen Rothwell