[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Move to git is imminent - awaiting Stefan's approval
From: |
Eli Zaretskii |
Subject: |
Re: Move to git is imminent - awaiting Stefan's approval |
Date: |
Tue, 07 Jan 2014 21:06:59 +0200 |
> From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" <address@hidden>
> Cc: Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden>,
> address@hidden,
> address@hidden,
> address@hidden,
> emacs <address@hidden>
> Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2014 03:49:24 +0900
>
> Sven Axelsson writes:
> > On 7 January 2014 19:05, Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> wrote:
> > >> From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" <address@hidden>
>
> > >> git-gc does not necessarily repack existing packs according to the
> > >> doc.
> > >>
> > >> Try git-repack.
> > >
> > > I thought "git gc" runs git-repack, no?
>
> It kinda pisses me off that you complain about the excessive detail of
> git documentation, and then ask others to tell you about the details
> you could read in the documentation.
I did read the documentation. The docs of gc mentions git-repack, so
I thought the former runs the latter. What part did I miss?
> Specifically, according to the help, git-gc removes garbage (in the
> usual sense of a tracing collector) and "compresses" (ie, packs) loose
> objects using delta compression (and then the result is deflated as
> with loose objects, I believe). It will repack the packs into *one*
> pack (presumably with better delta compression) if the number of packs
> is greater than the value of gc.autopacklimit (in .git/config;
> default: 50).
And how was I supposed to know from this whether git-repack will or
won't be run, what with the word "repack" explicitly in this text (and
in other parts of that man page)?
Don't bother answering if you are still pissed off.
- Re: Move to git is imminent - awaiting Stefan's approval, (continued)
- Re: Move to git is imminent - awaiting Stefan's approval, Andreas Schwab, 2014/01/07
- Re: Move to git is imminent - awaiting Stefan's approval, Angelo Graziosi, 2014/01/07
- Re: Move to git is imminent - awaiting Stefan's approval, Andreas Schwab, 2014/01/07
- Re: Move to git is imminent - awaiting Stefan's approval, Eli Zaretskii, 2014/01/07
- Re: Move to git is imminent - awaiting Stefan's approval, Óscar Fuentes, 2014/01/07
- Re: Move to git is imminent - awaiting Stefan's approval, Eli Zaretskii, 2014/01/07
- Re: Move to git is imminent - awaiting Stefan's approval, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2014/01/07
- Re: Move to git is imminent - awaiting Stefan's approval, Eli Zaretskii, 2014/01/07
- Re: Move to git is imminent - awaiting Stefan's approval, Sven Axelsson, 2014/01/07
- Re: Move to git is imminent - awaiting Stefan's approval, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2014/01/07
- Re: Move to git is imminent - awaiting Stefan's approval,
Eli Zaretskii <=
- Re: Move to git is imminent - awaiting Stefan's approval, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2014/01/07
- Re: Move to git is imminent - awaiting Stefan's approval, Eli Zaretskii, 2014/01/08
- Re: Move to git is imminent - awaiting Stefan's approval, Thien-Thi Nguyen, 2014/01/07
- Re: Move to git is imminent - awaiting Stefan's approval, Sven Axelsson, 2014/01/07
- Re: Move to git is imminent - awaiting Stefan's approval, Andreas Schwab, 2014/01/07
- Re: Move to git is imminent - awaiting Stefan's approval, Sven Axelsson, 2014/01/07
- Re: Move to git is imminent - awaiting Stefan's approval, Eli Zaretskii, 2014/01/07
- Re: Move to git is imminent - awaiting Stefan's approval, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2014/01/07
- Re: Move to git is imminent - awaiting Stefan's approval, Angelo Graziosi, 2014/01/07
- Re: Move to git is imminent - awaiting Stefan's approval, Eli Zaretskii, 2014/01/08