Re: Document clone of clone ... bug??

From: Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com>
Date: Jun 14, 2008, 20:34 UTC
Message-ID: <m3skvfpxgp.fsf@localhost.localdomain>
In-Reply-To: <20080614.221511.74741328.hanzl@noel.feld.cvut.cz>

Vaclav Hanzl <hanzl@noel.feld.cvut.cz> writes:

Show 8 quoted lines

> > The clone of clone does not have dangling objects; either it sees a ref
> > (because it is a branch in the clone) and it grabs the objects, or it
> > does not see it, in which case it does not download those objects.
> 
> Yes, there should not be a dangling object, but I actually got one. I
> was surprised, but I thought it is just an undocumented benign behavior
> (optimization overkill - clone rather gets those objects instead of
> thinking what it needs).

[...]

>  (cd B; git clone ../A/X)

_Local_ clone? This is result of optimization; in cloning over local filesystem case git-clone simply hardlinks object database (if possible) instead of transferring objects. This was only on request in earlier versions of git.

You can use filr:// protocol to force generating of pack-file and actual transfer of objects.

-- 
Jakub Narebski
Poland
ShadeHawk on #git