From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/6] Teach "fsck" not to follow subproject links Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2007 18:52:46 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: References: <461D6432.90205@vilain.net> <461D6858.4090007@vilain.net> <7vslb6mnva.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: Sam Vilain , Git Mailing List To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Apr 12 03:53:01 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1HboUb-0001sH-D4 for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Thu, 12 Apr 2007 03:52:57 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1161460AbXDLBww (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Apr 2007 21:52:52 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1161462AbXDLBww (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Apr 2007 21:52:52 -0400 Received: from smtp.osdl.org ([65.172.181.24]:41654 "EHLO smtp.osdl.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1161460AbXDLBwv (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Apr 2007 21:52:51 -0400 Received: from shell0.pdx.osdl.net (fw.osdl.org [65.172.181.6]) by smtp.osdl.org (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id l3C1qmVZ030191 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=NO); Wed, 11 Apr 2007 18:52:48 -0700 Received: from localhost (shell0.pdx.osdl.net [10.9.0.31]) by shell0.pdx.osdl.net (8.13.1/8.11.6) with ESMTP id l3C1qlYn020215; Wed, 11 Apr 2007 18:52:47 -0700 In-Reply-To: <7vslb6mnva.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.957 required=5 tests=AWL,OSDL_HEADER_SUBJECT_BRACKETED X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63-osdl_revision__1.119__ X-MIMEDefang-Filter: osdl$Revision: 1.177 $ X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.36 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Wed, 11 Apr 2007, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > The small detail in the last step is wrong, though. Even if > they EXIST, they may be isolated commits that are note connected > to refs, and fsck in the repository would not have warned about > unreachable trees from such unconnected commits. The superproject *is* a ref. You cannot prune the subprojects on their own. That's the *only* real special rule about subprojects. Exactly because pruning them on their own is not a valid op to do. It's the same way with an source of "alternate" objects (or a shared object directory) - you'd better not prune them, because other projects may have refs to them that you don't know about locally. So this isn't somethign new to subprojects. Linus