>> As for "smart" http, this seems pretty much cool.However, we're >> currently using lighthttpd, so it might be an issue. We'll check on >> whether "smart" http is used there, and if not guess it wouldn't be a >> big deal to switch to apache. > > The web server software has nothing to do with HTTP[S] used by Git being > "smart", I think, it just has to be set up properly. Misunderstood git doc then which says "it has to be Apache, currently - other CGI servers don't work, last I checked". > As discussed in an earlier thread here, a good indication of the > dumb version of the protocol being in use is no display of the > fetching progress on the client while doing `git clone` because this > information (like "compressing objects ..." etc) is sent by the > server-side Git process which is only there if HTTP[S] "was smart". > Otherwise the client just GETs packs of objects, traverses them, GETs > more and so on, so batches of HTTP GET requests correlating to clone > sessions in the web server logs should also be indicative of the > problem. Just to verify, if i see messages like "Receiving objects: 1% (7289/705777), 1.72 MiB | 340.00 KiB/s" it means server is "smart" ? -- With best regards, Sergey Sharybin -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html