From: Tomas Pospisek Date: Mon, 24 May 2010 09:26:44 GMT Subject: Re: Bug? file at the same time being deleted and not registered Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20100524084932.GA21051@coredump.intra.peff.net> On Mon, 24 May 2010, Jeff King wrote: > On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 10:29:02AM +0200, Tomas Pospisek wrote: > >>> If it's empty or 32 bytes, then that explains what status is reporting >>> (but the question still remains how we got into that state). >> >> There's no .git/index file there: >> >> $ ls -l .git/ >> total 36 >> drwxr-xr-x 2 tpo tpo 4096 2010-05-23 21:36 branches >> -rw-r--r-- 1 tpo tpo 4 2010-05-23 21:36 COMMIT_EDITMSG >> -rw-r--r-- 1 tpo tpo 73 2010-05-23 21:36 description >> -rw-r--r-- 1 tpo tpo 23 2010-05-23 21:36 HEAD >> drwxr-xr-x 2 tpo tpo 4096 2010-05-23 21:36 hooks >> drwxr-xr-x 2 tpo tpo 4096 2010-05-23 21:36 info >> drwxr-xr-x 3 tpo tpo 4096 2010-05-23 21:36 logs >> drwxr-xr-x 7 tpo tpo 4096 2010-05-24 09:26 objects >> drwxr-xr-x 4 tpo tpo 4096 2010-05-23 21:36 refs > > Thanks. That means "git status" is at least reporting the right thing. > Now we just need to figure out why, when the strace of commit shows it > being written and renamed into place, the index file is missing. > > I tried setting up a simple mhddfs mount to reproduce your problem, but > everything works fine for me. What version of mhddfs are you using? I'm > using version 0.1.28. I wonder if git is somehow triggering an mhddfs > bug. Looking through the svn logs for mhddfs, between 0.1.27 and 0.1.28, > there is a commit with message "fixed rename bug". It's version 0.1.28-1 from Ubuntu. *t