strange behaviour, default branch on clone not as expected

strange behaviour, default branch on clone not as expected

[Chris Friesen]

Hi,

I have a bare repository on a server with (among others) branches 
"atca6900-ecgl" and "ncgl".  The "HEAD" file in the bare repository 
contains "ref: refs/heads/ncgl" and "git branch" in the bare repository 
shows an asterisk beside "ncgl".

However, if I clone the bare repository I get "atca-6900-ecgl" as the 
default branch.  ".git/HEAD" contains "ref: refs/heads/atca6900-ecgl".

Something that might be relevent--currently both of these branches 
actually point to the same commit (Don't ask, it's a vendor thing.) thus 
"refs/heads/atca6900-ecgl" and "refs/heads/ncgl" have the same contents. 
  I find it suspicious that atca6900-ecgl is alphabetically before ncgl 
and that they point to the same commit ID...but I don't know how it 
works internally so this may be just coincidence.

Any ideas what's going on?  I'm using git 1.7.3.2 if it makes any 
difference.

Chris



-- 
Chris Friesen
Software Developer
GENBAND
chris.friesen@genband.com
www.genband.com

Re: strange behaviour, default branch on clone not as expected

[Junio C Hamano]

Chris Friesen <chris.friesen@genband.com> writes:

> I have a bare repository on a server with (among others) branches
> "atca6900-ecgl" and "ncgl".  The "HEAD" file in the bare repository
> contains "ref: refs/heads/ncgl" and "git branch" in the bare
> repository shows an asterisk beside "ncgl".
>
> However, if I clone the bare repository I get "atca-6900-ecgl" as the
> default branch.  ".git/HEAD" contains "ref: refs/heads/atca6900-ecgl".

If ncgl is at the same commit as the acta one, this is expected. The
protocol does not carry enough information to tell which branch HEAD
points at.