Re: Is "bare"ness in the context of multiple worktrees weird? Bitmap error in git gc.

From: Kristoffer Haugsbakk <code@khaugsbakk.name>
Date: Sep 4, 2023, 17:42 UTC
Message-ID: <fa25f0d3-392f-4fc5-826c-a19ed3cdb7ca@app.fastmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAPMMpohpKJdopSpZu+ehE0MZrH8cksgtY1NEHFyZz2jj+LOKhA@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Sep 4, 2023, at 17:29, Tao Klerks wrote:

Show 14 quoted lines

> On Mon, Sep 4, 2023 at 4:59 PM Tao Klerks <tao@klerks.biz> wrote:
>>
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>
> And to confuse matters further, I just stumbled across
> https://github.com/git/git/blob/master/contrib/workdir/git-new-workdir
> - I don't understand when you would want to use that vs, again, a bare
> repo with one or more worktrees properly attached via two-way
> references, their own indexes, their own reflogs, etc.
>
> Is it the case that this contrib script predates the current "git
> worktree" support?

Yes, according to VonC[1] and the 2.05 release notes.[2]

🔗 1: https://stackoverflow.com/a/30185564/1725151 🔗 2: https://github.com/git/git/blob/22aca1b3ac10af7188dccf033b44a36926f04d4b/Documentation/RelNotes/2.5.0.txt#L25-L27

-- 
Kristoffer Haugsbakk