On 31/05/2023 11:57, Philip Oakley wrote: > On 30/05/2023 19:14, Carlos wrote: >> Running git 2.40.1 with HEAD -> master, origin/main, origin/HEAD, origin/master, main with initial commit on main does not show all the objects from master >> >> >> ! [main] Initial commit >> * [master] Initial commit >> ! [origin/master] Initial commit >> --- >> +*+ [main] Initial commit >> > > this is the output of `git show-branch` [1] which has its own special > display format. It's not often used these days. > > The `!` are column markers, as is `*` for the current branch. > You have three branches listed > Then you have the `---` divider > > Finally you has the single commit, showing which branches the commit is > 'on'. > > Be careful to discriminate between being 'on' a branch (at it's tip, by > name); 'at' an oid (object id / hash); and `in` a branch (below its > tip); etc. > > > [1] https://git-scm.com/docs/git-show-branch > >> the chunk of objects are on master and not main, and yet it shows >> nothing once checking out to master. >> >> the git-clone operation is not consistent either. It's a disaster. >> >> One would think that by now with the more developed work put on to git, it'd >> be safe to assume the more sense there's on newer versions. But no. This >> is the opposite actually. >> >> Now. If by any chance the git-branch operation were to return: >> >> main >> * master >> >> after git-clone, then objects are indeed in place. That is. On master >> >> but not if git-branch returns >> >> main >> * master >> origin/master >> You may have accidentally created a local branch called `origin/master` which you are now confusing with the (unlisted) remote tracking branches. What does git branch -ra produce? It will show the local branches first, and then your `remotes/repo/branches` list (probably colourised). This should help confirm what you have. >> >> > Philip P.
