Re: Request for detailed documentation of git pack protocol
- From
Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com>
- Date
- Jun 3, 2009, 09:21 UTC
- Message-ID
- <200906031121.38616.jnareb@gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <20090603012940.GA3355@spearce.org>
On Wed, 3 Jun 2009, Shawn O. Pearce wrote:
Show 36 quoted lines
> Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Wed, 3 Jun 2009, Shawn O. Pearce wrote: >>>>> >>>>> The client connects and sends the request header. The clone command >>>>> >>>>> $ git clone git://myserver.com/project.git >>>>> >>>>> produces the following request: >>>>> >>>>> 0032git-upload-pack /project.git\\000host=myserver.com\\000 >> [...] >> >> So this mean that when cloning via SSH >> >> $ git clone ssh://myserver.com/project.git >> >> instead of this first request git would simply invoke [something like]: >> >> # ssh myserver.com git-upload-pack project.git > > Actually, > > # ssh myserver.com git-upload-pack /project.git > >> isn't it? (I am not sure if it uses "project.git" or "/project.git", >> and how it does generate full pathname for repository). > > In an ssh:// format URI, its absolute in the URI, so the / after > the host name (or port number) is sent as an argument, which is then > read by the remote git-upload-pack exactly as is, so its effectively > an absolute path in the remote filesystem. > > In a "user@host:path" format URI, its relative to the user's home > directory, because we run: > > # ssh user@host git-upload-pack path
By the way, this accidentally shows why one might want to prefer scp-like / ssh-like "URL" for SSH fetch / push, i.e.
[user@]myserver.com:/path/to/repo.git/
rather than ssh:// URL version
ssh://[user@]myserver.com/path/to/repo.git/
On the other hand I think only URL version allows to specify nonstandard port (well, that and ~/.ssh/config).
Show 5 quoted lines
>> BTW I wonder why we use stuffing here using "\0" / NUL as separator >> trick, and whether line has to be terminated with "\0", or can it be >> terminated with "\n". > > Stuffing here? What are we talking about again?
I'm sorry, I was too cryptic here.
I meant that in the request line for fetching via git:// protocol
0032git-upload-pack /project.git\\000host=myserver.com\\000
you separate path to repository from extra options using "\0" / NUL as a separator. Well, this is only sane separator, as it is path terminator, the only character which cannot appear in pathname (although I do wonder whether project names with e.g. control characters or UTF-8 characters would work correctly).
Is the final terminating character required to be NUL ("\0"), or can it be for LF ("\n"), i.e.
0032git-upload-pack /project.git\\000host=myserver.com\\n
What options besides (required?) "host=<server>[:<port>]" are supported? Do I understand correctly that "host=<host>" information is required for core.gitProxy to work, isn't it?
Show 8 quoted lines
>>>> * no-progress >> >> What that does mean? > > The client was started with "git clone -q" or something, and doesn't > want that side brand 2. Basically the client just says "I do not > wish to receive stream 2 on sideband, so do not send it to me, > and if you did, I will drop it on the floor anyway".
Does this mean that if server does not support "no-progress" capability then client is required to drop diagnostic by itself? Can client request to not use sideband (multiplexing) if it is asking for "no-progress"; or is multiplexing required for possible signaling of error condition on channel 3?
Show 11 quoted lines
>> It is a bit pity that git protocol was not created with extendability >> (like capabilities) in mind... > > Yes, no doubt. There are many things I would have done differently, > given that I now have 20/20 hindsight vision into the past's future. > > :-) > > The protocol (mostly) works fine as-is. Its widely distributed in > terms of clients using it on a daily basis. Its likely to continue > to serve our needs well into the future. So, it is what it is.
I do wonder if existing Internet Standard (in the meaning of RFC) protocols also have such kludges and hacks...
Show 12 quoted lines
>> By the way, how client does know that server started to send final >> data, i.e. packfile multiplexed / interleaved with progress reports, >> and should expect <pkt-line-band> rather than <pkt-line> output? > > After the client receives a "ACK" or "NAK" for the number of > outstanding flushes it still has, *after* it has sent "done". > This also varies based on whether or not multi_ack was enabled. > > Its ugly. But basically you keep a running counter of each "flush" > sent, and then you send a "done" out, and then you wait until > you have the right number of ACK/NAK answers back, and then the > stream changes format.
Hmmm... perhaps it would be better if pkt-line-sideband had some distinguishing characteristics from ordinary pkt-line, or that sending multiplexed (with sideband) output was preceded by some signal like "0001" or "0004" or "0005\n", or "000dsideband\n". But as you said hindsight is 20/20.
P.S. By the way, is pkt-line format original invention, or was it 'borrowed' from some other standard or protocol?
-- Jakub Narebski Poland