Re: bug in git-fsck-cache?
- From
- Stephen Rothwell <git@ozlabs.org>
- Date
- Sep 1, 2005, 02:02 UTC
- Message-ID
- <20050901120226.54547107.git@ozlabs.org>
- In-Reply-To
- <7v4q959857.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>
On Wed, 31 Aug 2005 13:13:56 -0700 Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net> wrote:
Show 12 quoted lines
> > Stephen Rothwell <git@ozlabs.org> writes: > > > The commit c594adad5653491813959277fb87a2fef54c4e05 is shown as > > "connected" (in Linus' tree, not one of my patches) by gitk, so I am happy > > that git prune did not get rid of it, but why does fsck-cache report it as > > dangling? > > Hmph. You ran fsck-cache by hand without --full (i.e. you told > it not to worry about objects already in packs); 'git prune' > runs it with '--full' to do the full connectivity analysis. I > think that's where the difference comes from.
ok, with '--full' nothing gets reported as dangling. That commit is not in a pack, but is in an object directory referenced through objects/info/alternates.
> Is that commit reachable from any of the refs hanging under your > $GIT_DIR/refs/? For example, do you have the Linus tip of the > master branch in $GIT_DIR/refs/heads/origin?
yes, master == origin and that commit is reachable from master according to gitk.
> If an object is already in a pack and later became unreachable > from any of your refs, there is no way to remove that object > from the pack, so dangling commits in a pack will be left > dangling even after 'git prune'.
It is still reachable as fsck-cache --full shows (I guess).
Cheers, Stephen Rothwell