From: Jeff King Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2013 19:23:50 GMT Subject: Re: propagating repo corruption across clone Message-ID: <20130324192350.GA20688@sigill.intra.peff.net> In-Reply-To: On Sun, Mar 24, 2013 at 08:01:33PM +0100, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: > On Sun, Mar 24, 2013 at 7:31 PM, Jeff King wrote: > > > > I don't have details on the KDE corruption, or why it wasn't detected > > (if it was one of the cases I mentioned above, or a more subtle issue). > > One thing worth mentioning is this part of the article: > > "Originally, mirrored clones were in fact not used, but non-mirrored > clones on the anongits come with their own set of issues, and are more > prone to getting stopped up by legitimate, authenticated force pushes, > ref deletions, and so on – and if we set the refspec such that those > are allowed through silently, we don’t gain much. " > > So the only reason they were even using --mirror was because they were > running into those problems with fetching. I think the --mirror thing is a red herring. It should not be changing the transport used, and that is the part of git that is expected to catch such corruption. But I haven't seen exactly what the corruption is, nor exactly what commands they used to clone. I've invited the blog author to give more details in this thread. > So aside from the problems with --mirror I think we should have > something that updates your local refs to be exactly like they are on > the other end, i.e. deletes some, non-fast-forwards others etc. > (obviously behind several --force options and so on). But such an > option *wouldn't* accept corrupted objects. That _should_ be how "git fetch --prune +refs/*:refs/*" behaves (and that refspec is set up when you use "--mirror"; we should probably have it turn on --prune, too, but I do not think you can do so via a config option currently). -Peff