From: Jeffrey Middleton <jefromi@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 16:39:14 GMT
Subject: Re: git update --prune issue
Message-ID: <4389ce950910270939u10fff402l6e9a5333913d7a74@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20091027162936.GA8130@sigill.intra.peff.net>

On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 11:29 AM, Jeff King <peff@peff.net> wrote:
> The "pruned" line basically means that we are deleting that ref, and
> then we complain immediately about that very ref (which is probably
> pointing to the null sha1 or something at this point). We tend to cache
> packed refs, so that may be the cause.

Actually, it force updated two refs, created one, and deleted one, and
then immediately complained about the force-updated refs - but only
after moving on into the next remote update.  My best guess would
still be that as you suggest there's an out of date cache - it gets
updated within the "update steph" part, but when it moves on to
"update kevin" it doesn't have all the new information.

> So either we need to invalidate that ref from the cache when it gets
> deleted, or perhaps we are already invalidating it and we need to be
> respecting that invalidation in other parts of the code. I'll take a
> look.
>
> -Peff
>