From: Hallvard Breien Furuseth <h.b.furuseth@usit.uio.no>
Date: Thu, 03 May 2012 16:20:43 GMT
Subject: Re: Newbie grief
Message-ID: <f66919ac273fd1c90839e5556f126960@ulrik.uio.no>
In-Reply-To: <e7c7047452954a4b80f5fd436103cb11-mfwitten@gmail.com>

 On Thu, 03 May 2012 16:09:15 -0000, Michael Witten wrote:
> On Thu, 03 May 2012 14:23:59 +0200, Hallvard Furuseth wrote:
>> I mean 'git clone --bare bar.git foo.git' does not give foo.git
>> a remote named 'origin' with a branch origin/master.  Not sure
>> if there is a _simple_ way to do it well either.  init + fetch
>> above does not try to hardlink objects/packs like clone does.
>>
>>> (...)
>>>   $ git init bar.git; cd bar.git
>>>   $ echo a > a; git add a; git commit -m a; cd ..
>>>   $ git clone --bare bar.git foo.git; cd foo.git
>>
>>    $ git branch -a
>>    * master
>
> From `git help clone':
>
>   --bare
>       Make a bare GIT repository. That is, instead of creating
>       <directory> and placing the administrative files in
>       <directory>/.git, make the <directory> itself the $GIT_DIR.
>       This obviously implies the -n because there is nowhere to
>       check out the working tree. Also the branch heads at the
>       remote are copied directly to corresponding local branch
>       heads, without mapping them to refs/remotes/origin/. When
>       this option is used, neither remote-tracking branches nor the
>       related configuration variables are created.

 Yes, I know.  I just don't know why.

-- 
 Hallvard