From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: clong an empty repo over ssh causes (harmless) fatal Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2009 15:08:27 -0400 Message-ID: <20090831190827.GA4876@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <2e24e5b90908310730u53ee27d3nd2b66c1f58202e7@mail.gmail.com> <20090831164146.GA23245@coredump.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: Sitaram Chamarty , Matthieu Moy , git@vger.kernel.org To: Sverre Rabbelier X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Aug 31 21:08:37 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1MiCF2-0005dn-Uy for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Mon, 31 Aug 2009 21:08:37 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754209AbZHaTI2 (ORCPT ); Mon, 31 Aug 2009 15:08:28 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754199AbZHaTI2 (ORCPT ); Mon, 31 Aug 2009 15:08:28 -0400 Received: from peff.net ([208.65.91.99]:58272 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753866AbZHaTI1 (ORCPT ); Mon, 31 Aug 2009 15:08:27 -0400 Received: (qmail 26272 invoked by uid 107); 31 Aug 2009 19:08:40 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) (smtp-auth username relayok, mechanism cram-md5) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.40) with ESMTPA; Mon, 31 Aug 2009 15:08:40 -0400 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Mon, 31 Aug 2009 15:08:27 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 07:12:44PM +0200, Sverre Rabbelier wrote: > On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 18:41, Jeff King wrote: > > IIRC, the message you are seeing comes when the _server_ is an older > > version of git. It is harmless, though. > > Mhhhh, is it some weird interaction between 'empty repository' patch > and old server versions, or did this happen too before my patch was > applied? I think the former. I thought it was discussed before, but the only reference I can find is this (see the end of the email): http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/107626 and I don't see any followup for that specific part of the mail. -Peff