>> As for "smart" http, this seems pretty much cool.However, we're
>> currently using lighthttpd, so it might be an issue. We'll check on
>> whether "smart" http is used there, and if not guess it wouldn't be a
>> big deal to switch to apache.
> The web server software has nothing to do with HTTP[S] used by Git being
> "smart", I think, it just has to be set up properly.

Misunderstood git doc then which says "it has to be Apache, currently
- other CGI servers don't work, last I checked".

> As discussed in an earlier thread here, a good indication of the
> dumb version of the protocol being in use is no display of the
> fetching progress on the client while doing `git clone` because this
> information (like "compressing objects ..." etc) is sent by the
> server-side Git process which is only there if HTTP[S] "was smart".
> Otherwise the client just GETs packs of objects, traverses them, GETs
> more and so on, so batches of HTTP GET requests correlating to clone
> sessions in the web server logs should also be indicative of the
> problem.

Just to verify, if i see messages like "Receiving objects:   1%
(7289/705777), 1.72 MiB | 340.00 KiB/s" it means server is "smart" ?

With best regards, Sergey Sharybin
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