John Szakmeister <> writes:

> On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 8:44 AM, Max Horn <> wrote:
> [snip]

>> I am unable to reproduce this on Mac OS X 10.7.5 with git
>> nor with current git maint. Command run inside /tmp, which is on
>> a normal HFS+ volume (using the default settings, i.e. the FS is
>> case insensitive).
>> $ git --version
>> git version
>> $ git clone --depth 1 git://
>> Cloning into 'packages'...
>> remote: Counting objects: 4711, done.
>> remote: Compressing objects: 100% (3998/3998), done.
>> remote: Total 4711 (delta 157), reused 3326 (delta 94)
>> Receiving objects: 100% (4711/4711), 3.85 MiB | 0 bytes/s, done.
>> Resolving deltas: 100% (157/157), done.
> OK, so I finally tracked it down.  Commit
> 6035d6aad8ca11954c0d7821f6f3e7c047039c8f fixes it:
>     commit 6035d6aad8ca11954c0d7821f6f3e7c047039c8f
>     Author: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <>
>     Date:   Sun May 26 08:16:15 2013 +0700
>         fetch-pack: prepare updated shallow file before fetching the pack
> ...
> It looks like I was hitting the race condition.  It's fixed on master,
> so I assume it will be in

Hmmmph, I do not think the cited change is about any "race".

If it were that we spawn index-pack and write updated shallow
information at the same time, and depending on the timings,
index-pack may not read the updated one and fail, then it would have
been a "race", but that is not the above change is about.  If you
saw the issue on MacOS, you would have seen the same breakage, as
long as you started from the same repository status, on other
platforms, and reliably.

An early part of nd/clone-connectivity-shortcut topic contains the
said commit, and I do not mind merging it to the maintenance track,
but I suspect that there is something else going on on your OS X
box, if you saw differences between platforms.

Perhaps on your OS X box you have {transfer,fetch}.fsckobjects set
to true while on others it is set to false, or something?
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Reply via email to