Re: GIT_OBJECT_DIRECTORY

From: Jörn Engel <joern@wohnheim.fh-wedel.de>
Date: Apr 18, 2006, 18:58 UTC
Message-ID: <20060418185859.GA7504@wohnheim.fh-wedel.de>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0604181139150.3701@g5.osdl.org>

On Tue, 18 April 2006 11:47:53 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:

Show 6 quoted lines

> On Tue, 18 Apr 2006, Jörn Engel wrote:
> > 
> > But it appears as if I could "cp -lr" the git tree and work with that.
> 
> That should work. I just personally fear cowlinks, because some things 
> will edit the files in place, and then you're screwed.

s/cowlinks/hardlinks/ ?

The reason for me to write the cowlink patches was exactly the fear you are talking about. With those patches, links are broken whenever such a thing happens.

> I _think_ it should be ok for the .git subdirectory, but quite frankly, 
> I'm not going to guarantee it. Also, you will break the cow-linking when 
> you ever re-pack either the source or the destination, so you'd actually

In that case, cowlinks should still turn a blatant bug into some wasted space - which is a hell of a lot better.

> 	# cow-link the checked-out state

And this happens to be a problem. Creating the links when the copy is created is simple. Detecting identical files and linking them after the fact is racy, complicated, racy and, well, racy. I wouldn't want to touch it with a ten foot pole. Not without kernel support.

Jörn

-- 
Linux is more the core point of a concept that surrounds "open source"
which, in turn, is based on a false concept. This concept is that
people actually want to look at source code.
-- Rob Enderle