Re: [PATCH] repack: add config to skip updating server info
- From
Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com>
- Date
- Mar 11, 2022, 16:20 UTC
- Message-ID
- <Yit22Xcs6iF4MVB7@nand.local>
- In-Reply-To
- <659d5528df56f6b9aece6b1f3c4e2e5a4ae04e1e.1646996936.git.ps@pks.im>
On Fri, Mar 11, 2022 at 12:09:30PM +0100, Patrick Steinhardt wrote:
Show 11 quoted lines
> diff --git a/Documentation/config/repack.txt b/Documentation/config/repack.txt > index 9c413e177e..22bfc26afc 100644 > --- a/Documentation/config/repack.txt > +++ b/Documentation/config/repack.txt > @@ -25,3 +25,6 @@ repack.writeBitmaps:: > space and extra time spent on the initial repack. This has > no effect if multiple packfiles are created. > Defaults to true on bare repos, false otherwise. > + > +repack.updateServerInfo:: > + If set to false, git-repack will not run git-update-server-info.
Can you clarify here what the default value of this config variable is, and how it interacts with repack's `-n` flag? E.g., something along the lines of:
repack.updateServerInfo::
If set to false, linkgit:git-repack[1] will not run
linkgit:git-update-serve-info[1]. Defaults to true. Can be
overridden when true by the `-n` option of
linkgit:git-repack[1].Perhaps a little verbose, but I think it leaves less ambiguity about what this new configuration variable is for.
Show 9 quoted lines
> diff --git a/builtin/repack.c b/builtin/repack.c > index da1e364a75..3baa993da2 100644 > --- a/builtin/repack.c > +++ b/builtin/repack.c > @@ -22,6 +22,7 @@ static int delta_base_offset = 1; > static int pack_kept_objects = -1; > static int write_bitmaps = -1; > static int use_delta_islands; > +static int no_update_server_info = 0;
Not the fault of this patch, but I wonder if this would be less confusing if we stored `update_server_info` instead of `no_update_server_info`. If you have time, I think it may be worth a preparatory patch at the beginning to swap the two.
Show 10 quoted lines
> +test_expect_success 'updates server info by default' ' > + git init repo && > + test_when_finished "rm -rf repo" && > + test_commit -C repo message && > + test_path_is_missing repo/.git/objects/info/packs && > + test_path_is_missing repo/.git/info/refs && > + git -C repo repack && > + test_path_is_file repo/.git/objects/info/packs && > + test_path_is_file repo/.git/info/refs > +'
I wonder if this and the below tests might be cleaned up with a pair of helper functions, perhaps:
test_server_info_present () {
test_path_is_file .git/objects/info/packs &&
test_path_is_file .git/info/refs
} test_server_info_missing () {
test_path_is_missing .git/objects/info/packs &&
test_path_is_missing .git/info/refs
}t7700 has a mix of styles, but it may shorten some of the lines to use a subshell that is changed into the repo directory, e.g., the test above would become:
test_expect_success 'updates server info by default' '
git init repo &&
test_when_finished "rm -fr repo" &&
(
test_commit message &&
test_server_info_missing &&
git repack &&
test_server_info_present
)
'which reads a little more easily to me. It would be nice to avoid creating the sub-repos at all, perhaps by removing these files ourselves in between tests.
> +test_expect_success '-n skips updating server info' ' > +test_expect_success 'repack.updateServerInfo=true updates server info' ' > +test_expect_success 'repack.updateServerInfo=false skips updating server info' ' > +test_expect_success '-n overrides repack.updateServerInfo=true' '
Great, these four and the above together cover all of the cases I think we'd be interested in.
Thanks, Taylor