From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: Question about your git habits Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2008 17:51:04 -0800 Message-ID: <7vfxvk4f07.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <200802221837.37680.chase.venters@clientec.com> <20080223014445.GK27894@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Jan Engelhardt , Chase Venters , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, git@vger.kernel.org To: Al Viro X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sat Feb 23 02:52:20 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1JSjYn-0002gi-OM for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Sat, 23 Feb 2008 02:52:18 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754043AbYBWBvY (ORCPT ); Fri, 22 Feb 2008 20:51:24 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754003AbYBWBvY (ORCPT ); Fri, 22 Feb 2008 20:51:24 -0500 Received: from a-sasl-fastnet.sasl.smtp.pobox.com ([207.106.133.19]:56961 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753173AbYBWBvY (ORCPT ); Fri, 22 Feb 2008 20:51:24 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-sasl-fastnet.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3F1F566F; Fri, 22 Feb 2008 20:51:19 -0500 (EST) Received: from pobox.com (ip68-225-240-77.oc.oc.cox.net [68.225.240.77]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a-sasl-fastnet.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A1BB9566B; Fri, 22 Feb 2008 20:51:12 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <20080223014445.GK27894@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> (Al Viro's message of "Sat, 23 Feb 2008 01:44:45 +0000") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Al Viro writes: > On Sat, Feb 23, 2008 at 02:37:00AM +0100, Jan Engelhardt wrote: > >> >do you tend to clone the entire repository repeatedly into a series >> >of separate working directories >> >> Too time consuming on consumer drives with projects the size of Linux. > > git clone -l -s > > is not particulary slow... How big is a checkout of a single revision of kernel these days, compared to a well-packed history since v2.6.12-rc2? The cost of writing out the work tree files isn't ignorable and probably more than writing out the repository data (which -s saves for you).