From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF541C2BB1D for ; Tue, 14 Apr 2020 20:31:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E3082076A for ; Tue, 14 Apr 2020 20:31:15 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=ttaylorr-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.i=@ttaylorr-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.b="MKZpOKO5" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2633147AbgDNUbL (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Apr 2020 16:31:11 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:38982 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2633142AbgDNUbG (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Apr 2020 16:31:06 -0400 Received: from mail-pj1-x1041.google.com (mail-pj1-x1041.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::1041]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 90E00C061A0E for ; Tue, 14 Apr 2020 13:31:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pj1-x1041.google.com with SMTP id nu11so5702586pjb.1 for ; Tue, 14 Apr 2020 13:31:04 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ttaylorr-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=apdGjphPGUhVveY1nlw/K5r3tMOswtUTcKPQSxUNrh8=; b=MKZpOKO5tuM1O4DQ8P1gkcB4b4jTJyNAGRar+xaG+O7S/VK6cA99rnN+85uUHP+S+2 Q7dx3uBIsTnXshLI5QjyXEQWqsSKXET9HL6dOoOFlWI7H4lkZ8WEByanzSNUQDlQm25h cbnKxvU3w11vsnhw+mN8dyTKfLPRxQX6C+K9WLlxclAajt1+crFoa2/CTc/yod67fGcW RZqoU7f2D1SpsMlgduYngNxKQXrN7cgUhIoWOytd6SLHxtVJejGPaRBL4EMN+1z2mR7S uzWVt2HVrbzVS+pXRw7FZompDIIrMIJ3d+zjTFjz5qd3RjGEqk8wcV7wWoFetoBkVrFG 7Ggg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=apdGjphPGUhVveY1nlw/K5r3tMOswtUTcKPQSxUNrh8=; b=ORR3eIAgFYkO3U5lbvuZ9ZXMAjddzUeXVVG6B/QVG8CXDQojQedbo+t3LBUQxQDGi9 5MCDx97ew8xoKKHVLD/bxzrz12d5xmeq1kJjE9tMWfo50rnwFcDOSnMuin5Tf7oiTdKw HPnMUn24qPP8JGo6jE0VWShtMILMEXl3Oj+vBPfSp3YFyBfig8LuDBjSIPQfqy50BdMn XoZgAIqF99fAmuXTkfRs6rREG/ORdm+QNn9EY54G1E1k9Uj6VEMUO2GPTNmkjv4LnJCZ FMw43HjVuzEm6Ky3RtpsE/qa92F2lERlhz63dtYfEwMeMO8+8a+0+eE06V5EcrMYkbnn 1lsQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AGi0PuYxAglm+MZ8dJXruxTL6I9XG+1D/dV8+SJs/v99X3NexKg++b6E WSOdUSkkl/7AkGkg6qUwG+18tg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypKp0aKcN6NwYEwJMBFp3usH/gabEV9+I8FDCJsB85k7bYvdKHbvu7cLQQ8G4XyzeW6Q/fgFPw== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:403:: with SMTP id 3mr1677107ple.102.1586896263981; Tue, 14 Apr 2020 13:31:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([8.44.146.30]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id u16sm10532011pgf.52.2020.04.14.13.31.02 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 14 Apr 2020 13:31:03 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2020 14:31:01 -0600 From: Taylor Blau To: Elijah Newren Cc: Git Mailing List , Derrick Stolee Subject: Re: Is fetch.writeCommitGraph (and thus features.experimental) meant to work in the presence of shallow clones? Message-ID: <20200414203101.GE93424@syl.local> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 01:22:45PM -0700, Elijah Newren wrote: > Hi, > > I was building a version of git for internal use, and thought I'd try > turning on features.experimental to get more testing of it. The > following test error in the testsuite scared me, though: > > t5537.9 (fetch --update-shallow): > > ... > + git fetch --update-shallow ../shallow/.git refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/shallow/* > remote: Enumerating objects: 18, done. > remote: Counting objects: 100% (18/18), done. > remote: Compressing objects: 100% (6/6), done. > remote: Total 16 (delta 0), reused 6 (delta 0), pack-reused 0 > Unpacking objects: 100% (16/16), 1.16 KiB | 1.17 MiB/s, done. > From ../shallow/ > * [new branch] master -> shallow/master > * [new tag] heavy-tag -> heavy-tag > * [new tag] light-tag -> light-tag > error: Could not read ac67d3021b4319951fb176469d7732e6914530c5 > error: Could not read ac67d3021b4319951fb176469d7732e6914530c5 > error: Could not read ac67d3021b4319951fb176469d7732e6914530c5 > fatal: unable to parse commit ac67d3021b4319951fb176469d7732e6914530c5 > > Passing -c fetch.writeCommitGraph=false to the fetch command in that > test makes it pass. This failure makes sense, since taking the reachability closure over the ref tips will fail in shallow clones of repositories that have more than one commit. I wonder if fetch should be taught to avoid generating commit-graphs (and ignore 'fetch.writeCommitGraph') when in a shallow clone. > There were also a couple other tests that failed with > features.experimental=true (in t5500), but those weren't scary -- they > were just checking exact want/have lines and features.experimental is > intended to change those. This test from t5537 was the only one that > showed some unexpected fatal error. > > Thanks, > Elijah Thanks, Taylor