From: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 04:16:24 GMT
Subject: Re: Efficiency of initial clone from server
Message-ID: <7vd54gau3r.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0702112022430.1757@xanadu.home>

Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org> writes:

> On Sun, 11 Feb 2007, Jon Smirl wrote:
>
>> On 2/11/07, Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org> wrote:
>> > Jon Smirl <jonsmirl@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > remote: Total 63, written 63 (delta 0), reused 63 (delta 0)
>> > > 100% (63/63) done
>> > > fatal: pack: not a valid SHA1
>> > > New branch: 0953670fbcb75e26fb93340bddae934e85618f2e
>> >
>> > What version of git is this?  That looks like we're assuming the word
>> > pack was an object, but I'm not sure why we would do such a thing...
>
> This "pack" comes from pack-index when providing the name of the pack.
> It is either "pack" or "keep" and specifies the name of the .keep file 
> to remove in the later case.
> This is caught by git-fetch.sh with some code identified with a comment 
> that reads: "# special line coming from index-pack with the pack name"

That is true only if Jon used git-fetch, git-pull or git-clone.
Unfortunately I noticed that his commandline read "cg clone".