On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 09:32:12AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Greg KH <gre...@linuxfoundation.org> writes:
> > The way we upload the Linux kernel to kernel.org involves creating a tar
> > archive, signing the archive, and then just uploading the signature.
> > The server then checks out the repo based on the tag, generates the tar
> > archive and checks the signature to make sure they match.
> > 
> > A few days ago I released the 3.0.61 kernel, and it turned out that I
> > couldn't upload the kernel release because 'git archive' now creates a
> > binary file that differs from an older version of git.
> > ...
> > Now keeping binary compatibility of tar archive files isn't really a big
> > deal, but, the commit to git that causes this seems a bit odd, is it
> > really needed?  Or can we just fix the version of tar with NetBSD
> > instead?  :)
> >
> > Any ideas?
> How about fixing kup to teach the "let's cheat and let the other end
> run 'git archive', if the resulting archive and GPG signature
> locally created does match, we do not have to transfer the tarball
> itself" trick a fall-back mode that says "but if the signature does
> not match, then transfer the bulk used to create the signature to
> the remote anyway".  This fallback can and should of course be
> useful for the compressed patch transfer.

Ugh, uploading a 431Mb file, over a flaky wireless connection (I end up
doing lots of kernel releases while traveling), would be a horrible
change.  I'd rather just keep using the same older version of git that
kernel.org is running instead.


greg k-h
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to