Re: [PATCH] pack-objects: proper pack time stamping with --max-pack-size
- From
Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org>
- Date
- Mar 14, 2008, 04:39 UTC
- Message-ID
- <alpine.LFD.1.00.0803140035260.2947@xanadu.home>
- In-Reply-To
- <7vmyp1vsa7.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org>
On Thu, 13 Mar 2008, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Show 24 quoted lines
> Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org> writes: > > > Runtime pack access is done in the pack file mtime order since recent > > packs are more likely to contain frequently used objects than old packs. > > However the --max-pack-size option can produce multiple packs with mtime > > in the reversed order as newer objects are always written first. > > > > Let's modify mtime of later pack files (when any) so they appear older > > than preceding ones when a repack creates multiple packs. > > > > Signed-off-by: Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org> > > --- > > diff --git a/builtin-pack-objects.c b/builtin-pack-objects.c > > index f504cff..4c2ed70 100644 > > --- a/builtin-pack-objects.c > > +++ b/builtin-pack-objects.c > > @@ -17,6 +17,8 @@ > > #include "progress.h" > > #include "refs.h" > > > > +#include <utime.h> > > + > > Hmmm. Shouldn't this go to git-compat-util.h?
Maybe... if you say so.
The whole header file arrangement logic is somewhat escaping my mind, so I simply decided to do the same as in test-chmtime.c.
Nicolas