Re: [QUESTION] about .git/info/grafts file

From: Franck <vagabon.xyz@gmail.com>
Date: Jan 20, 2006, 10:07 UTC
Message-ID: <cda58cb80601200207g7c3495ddx@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <7virsf7lb9.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>

2006/1/20, Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>:

Show 23 quoted lines

> Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net> writes:
>
> > It _might_ work if you tell your downloader to have a proper
> > graft file in his repository to cauterize the commit ancestry
> > chain _before_ he pulls from you, though.  I haven't tried it
> > (and honestly I did not feel that is something important to
> > support, so it might work by accident but that is not by
> > design).
>
> I just tried it and it actually works.
>
>         $ git clone git.git junk
>         $ cd junk ;# I am not brave enough to risk the real thing ;-)
>         $ git rev-parse master~4 >.git/refs/info/grafts
>         $ cd ..
>         $ mkdir cloned
>         $ cd cloned
>         $ git init-db
>         $ cp ../junk/.git/info/grafts .git/info/
>         $ git clone-pack ../baz
>         $ git fsck-objects --full
>         $ git log --pretty=short | cat
>

Just to be sure, what you call baz is actually junk ?

> This "only the tip of the git.git" repository has about 450
> objects in it, fully packed because of clone-pack, with one 680K
> packfile.

I tried that but I don't have same results. Did you delete all branchs except master before running clone-pack ? In my case I cloned the whole thing. So junk and cloned repos are the same size

> I think the true full history of git.git/ packed into
> one is aruond a 5MB packfile.  I suspect a bigger repository
> would not see that much size reduction, as Linus already
> explained here.

sorry, but I didn't understand his explaination, surely because of my very limited knowledge about git internals...

Show 5 quoted lines

>
> You could emulate what I just did above to prepare the
> equivalent of "baz" above, and make it available over git://
> protocol, say at git://franck.example.com/franck.git/.
>

does the git protocol is really needed in your example ? or can rsync work fine too since "franck.git" repo is cautorized so every objects of this repo shouldn't be part of old history, so they should be usefull, no ?

Thanks.
--
               Franck