# strange behaviour, default branch on clone not as expected 2 messages from 2011-10-03 to 2011-10-03. Participants: Chris Friesen, Junio C Hamano. Thread: https://gitlist.dev/t/28561 ## Chris Friesen, 2011-10-03 16:50 Subject: strange behaviour, default branch on clone not as expected Message-ID: <4E89E7E1.4000907@genband.com> URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/4E89E7E1.4000907%40genband.com ``` Hi, I have a bare repository on a server with (among others) branches "atca6900-ecgl" and "ncgl". The "HEAD" file in the bare repository contains "ref: refs/heads/ncgl" and "git branch" in the bare repository shows an asterisk beside "ncgl". However, if I clone the bare repository I get "atca-6900-ecgl" as the default branch. ".git/HEAD" contains "ref: refs/heads/atca6900-ecgl". Something that might be relevent--currently both of these branches actually point to the same commit (Don't ask, it's a vendor thing.) thus "refs/heads/atca6900-ecgl" and "refs/heads/ncgl" have the same contents. I find it suspicious that atca6900-ecgl is alphabetically before ncgl and that they point to the same commit ID...but I don't know how it works internally so this may be just coincidence. Any ideas what's going on? I'm using git 1.7.3.2 if it makes any difference. Chris -- Chris Friesen Software Developer GENBAND chris.friesen@genband.com www.genband.com ``` ## Junio C Hamano, 2011-10-03 17:35 Subject: Re: strange behaviour, default branch on clone not as expected Message-ID: <7vbotygeqv.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/7vbotygeqv.fsf%40alter.siamese.dyndns.org In-Reply-To: <4E89E7E1.4000907@genband.com> ``` Chris Friesen writes: > I have a bare repository on a server with (among others) branches > "atca6900-ecgl" and "ncgl". The "HEAD" file in the bare repository > contains "ref: refs/heads/ncgl" and "git branch" in the bare > repository shows an asterisk beside "ncgl". > > However, if I clone the bare repository I get "atca-6900-ecgl" as the > default branch. ".git/HEAD" contains "ref: refs/heads/atca6900-ecgl". If ncgl is at the same commit as the acta one, this is expected. The protocol does not carry enough information to tell which branch HEAD points at. ```