Re: git binary directory?

From: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Date: Nov 7, 2005, 17:27 UTC
Message-ID: <7vvez4s6zv.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0511061653380.3316@g5.osdl.org>

Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org> writes:

Show 9 quoted lines

> On Mon, 7 Nov 2005, Petr Baudis wrote:
>> 
>> I want to avoid extra fork()s and exec()s. They seem to routinely matter
>> in orders of magnitude of speed in tight loops.
>
> Yes. The more I think about it, the less I like the separate binary 
> directory after all. The "git cmd" format is great for high-level 
> commands, but we've always done "git-diff-tree" and "git-rev-list" etc 
> without the "git cmd" indirection.

Extra fork() and exec() problem still exists, but "git cmd" format have worked with "git diff-tree" and "git rev-list" for quite some time (since Jun 14th), so you might've always done it with dash but that is not a requirement.

It looks like that both you and Pasky are not so enthusiastic about moving thing out of /usr/bin/, so let's keep things the way they are for 1.0 release and rethink when we do 2.0 (or whatever comes after 1.0).