# clone --bare vs push 5 messages from 2011-01-03 to 2011-01-04. Participants: Levend Sayar, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason, Neal Kreitzinger, Jonathan Nieder. Thread: https://gitlist.dev/t/26181 ## Levend Sayar, 2011-01-03 18:24 Subject: clone --bare vs push Message-ID: URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/AANLkTi%3DRNDYrRbyEJXA_c30JEVr%3DSYUQ01cfA3FyWpLT%40mail.gmail.com In-Reply-To: ``` Hi, all. We cloned a repo from github on our local server. Say X for this. At that repo, we did git clone --bare X y.git Now y.git is ready for other machines to clone. To update our upstream repo X, we do git pull and then git push --all to update y.git. Now questions: 1) When I compare X/.git directory and y.git directory there are many objects missing in y.git. What is the reason ? 2) git clone --bare is too fast. My .git directory is nearly 1GB. How can it be copied that much fast ? 3) Is this more safe then git pull, git push rm -rf y.git git pull git clone --bare X y.git Namely bare cloning each time when we update our main repo ? TIA _lvnd_ (^_^) ``` ## Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason, 2011-01-03 18:41 Subject: Re: clone --bare vs push Message-ID: URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/AANLkTimsOxfnKHLRMH6JSQbrGKzaOgh_gLuc1gT4JraF%40mail.gmail.com In-Reply-To: ``` On Mon, Jan 3, 2011 at 19:24, Levend Sayar wrote: > 1) When I compare X/.git directory and y.git directory there are many > objects missing in y.git. What is the reason ? Maybe things were repacked. > 2) git clone --bare is too fast. My .git directory is nearly 1GB. How > can it be copied that much fast ? It will use hardlinks when using the same filesystem. See --no-hardlinks in git-clone(1). ``` ## Neal Kreitzinger, 2011-01-04 04:40 Subject: Re: clone --bare vs push Message-ID: URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/ifu8d2%24t61%241%40dough.gmane.org In-Reply-To: ``` "Levend Sayar" wrote in message news:AANLkTi=RNDYrRbyEJXA_c30JEVr=SYUQ01cfA3FyWpLT@mail.gmail.com... > Hi, all. > > We cloned a repo from github on our local server. Say X for this. At > that repo, we did > > git clone --bare X y.git > > Now y.git is ready for other machines to clone. > > To update our upstream repo X, we do > > git pull > > and then > > git push --all > > to update y.git. > > Now questions: > > 1) When I compare X/.git directory and y.git directory there are many > objects missing in y.git. What is the reason ? > > 2) git clone --bare is too fast. My .git directory is nearly 1GB. How > can it be copied that much fast ? > > 3) Is this more safe then git pull, git push > > rm -rf y.git > git pull > git clone --bare X y.git > > Namely bare cloning each time when we update our main repo ? > > TIA > > _lvnd_ > (^_^) you can also use the file:// url format to create a complete copy and not use hardlinks. see git-clone manpage. e.g. git clone --bare file:///fullpathto/X y.git v/r, Neal ``` ## Jonathan Nieder, 2011-01-04 04:58 Subject: Re: clone --bare vs push Message-ID: <20110104045839.GA8225@burratino> URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/20110104045839.GA8225%40burratino In-Reply-To: ``` Neal Kreitzinger wrote: > you can also use the file:// url format to create a complete copy and not > use hardlinks. see git-clone manpage. > > e.g. git clone --bare file:///fullpathto/X y.git Thanks, that's useful; cc-ing Levend. [Side note: I wrote in the past: | In traditional newsgroups it seems to be most common to just reply to | the author by mail or follow-up to the group, so I wouldn't feel too | bad. but probably that was unclear of me. The convention on _this_ list[1] is to reply to all participants in a thread, so new participants do not need to subscribe if they don't want to. Thunderbird (e.g.) seems to be good at doing that for what it's worth.] [1] at least as I perceive it; please feel free to correct me if I have misunderstood ``` ## Neal Kreitzinger, 2011-01-04 05:29 Subject: Re: clone --bare vs push Message-ID: <4D22B037.9010408@gmail.com> URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/4D22B037.9010408%40gmail.com In-Reply-To: <20110104045839.GA8225@burratino> ``` On 1/3/2011 10:58 PM, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > Neal Kreitzinger wrote: > >> you can also use the file:// url format to create a complete copy and not >> use hardlinks. see git-clone manpage. >> >> e.g. git clone --bare file:///fullpathto/X y.git > > Thanks, that's useful; cc-ing Levend. > > [Side note: I wrote in the past: > > | In traditional newsgroups it seems to be most common to just reply to > | the author by mail or follow-up to the group, so I wouldn't feel too > | bad. > > but probably that was unclear of me. The convention on _this_ list[1] is > to reply to all participants in a thread, so new participants do not > need to subscribe if they don't want to. Thunderbird (e.g.) seems to > be good at doing that for what it's worth.] > > [1] at least as I perceive it; please feel free to correct me if I > have misunderstood This is a "reply all" from thunderbird. This looks like it is doing the cc correctly... v/r, Neal ```