On Sun, 17 Feb 2008, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > Hi, > > On Sun, 17 Feb 2008, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > > Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@xxxxxx> writes: > > > > > On Sat, 16 Feb 2008, Daniel Barkalow wrote: > > > > > >> I wonder if the problem is that something isn't getting reinitialized > > >> for the second connection. It's not a separate invocation of > > >> fetch-pack, and I can't say for sure that it's sending the right info > > >> to the server when the statics in builtin-fetch-pack.c are left over > > >> from the earlier call. This would particularly explain the > > >> information that hitting ctrl-c and trying again fixes it. > > > > > > Oh, that should be it! After all, the code in get_rev() in > > > builtin-fetch-pack.c marks commits as SEEN and COMMON and POPPED. > > > > I seem to be slow today, but how does that explain that the problem is > > reported only by Len so far? > > Hmm. The code I was referencing is only in "next" so far, right? And > AFAICT it only occurs when you are fetching something which autofetches > tags, right? I think the code you referenced is quite old; the new thing is having it called twice in the same process, and that's also in "master" along with builtin-fetch, I think. > But thinking about this again: do we reuse the connection also for > automatic tag fetching? If not, my whole reasoning is wrong. No, the way the protocol works, you can't request more stuff after you've received stuff on a connection, so we have to start a second one for that case. -Daniel *This .sig left intentionally blank* - 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
