On Mon, Sep 01, 2008 at 09:14:33PM -0400, Jeff King wrote: > On Tue, Sep 02, 2008 at 03:04:10AM +0200, Petr Baudis wrote: > > > Unfortunately, I'm not aware how to decreate the packs count with > > current Git without losing _any_ objects. So yes, you could say that > > this is an artifact of the forking infrastructure - we just can't afford > > to lose objects. > > Hmm, I thought that was the point of adding the "-A" flag to git-repack. Ok, I did git repack -A -d in repo.or.cz's git.git. What next? I have brand-new -rw-rw-r-- 1 root root 1314056 2008-09-02 13:07 pack-d19ca8b0cfd0e3357c475a3e96ce55b9f7195667.idx -rw-rw-r-- 1 root root 17344999 2008-09-02 13:07 pack-d19ca8b0cfd0e3357c475a3e96ce55b9f7195667.pack but all the old packs too; git repack didn't delete anything, git prune-packed seems to have no effect either. > Though an even simpler solution, since you control all of the repos, is > to just temporarily add references from the "parent" of the fork to > every ref of every forked child. Then do the repack in the parent, which > should then contain all of the objects for all of the children, delete > the temporary references, and prune in the children (who should see most > of their objects now in the parent). So not just refs but also alternates? What if someone accesses the reposiory at that moment? I would also need to make the symlinks quite densely to avoid refs/forkee/-induced loops. I might as well just use a common repository for all the forks then. But this does not scale at all for dumb transports, does it? -- Petr "Pasky" Baudis The next generation of interesting software will be done on the Macintosh, not the IBM PC. -- Bill Gates -- 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
