Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Eric Wong <e@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> > I'm somewhat surprised this check didn't already exist;
> > but maybe nobody else runs prune manually, anymore.
>
> The only time an end user would run "git prune" in their
> repositories with working trees these days is "git repack" followed
> by "git prune", I would guess.
Right, I wanted to drop some sensitive data with that.
> You generally cannot compare a timestamp you read from the
> filesystem and the timestamp you obtain from time(2) when network
> filesystems are involved, so I am not sure the implementation is
> quite right, though.
Yes, but I'm not aware of a good way to deal with this;
I would expect machines on the same network would have
synchronized times.
Perhaps having a small slack time (one second?) could mitigate
some problems with machines being slightly off:
start = time(NULL) - 1;
And then warning if it encountered files within the slack
period and asking the user to rerun "prune" if needed.
But I'm not sure it's worth it.
Any other suggestions?
Thanks.
Having prune prevent object creation entirely while running
seems unacceptable.
--
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