On Wed, Feb 05, 2014 at 12:31:34PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Jeff King <[email protected]> writes:
>
> > The minimal fix you posted below does make sense to me as a stopgap, and
> > we can look into dropping the code entirely during the next cycle. It
> > would be nice to have a test to cover this case, though.
>
> Sounds sensible. Run "repack -a -d" once, and then another while
> forcing it to be single threaded, or something?
Certainly that's the way to trigger the code, but doing this:
diff --git a/t/t7700-repack.sh b/t/t7700-repack.sh
index b45bd1e..6647ba1 100755
--- a/t/t7700-repack.sh
+++ b/t/t7700-repack.sh
@@ -162,7 +162,12 @@ test_expect_success 'objects made unreachable by grafts
only are kept' '
git reflog expire --expire=$test_tick --expire-unreachable=$test_tick
--all &&
git repack -a -d &&
git cat-file -t $H1
- '
+'
+
+test_expect_success 'repack can handle generating the same pack again' '
+ git -c pack.threads=1 repack -ad &&
+ git -c pack.threads=1 repack -ad
+'
test_done
...does not seem to fail, and it does not seem to leave any cruft in
place. So maybe I am misunderstanding the thing the patch is meant to
fix. Is it that we simply do not replace the pack in this instance?
I guess we would have to generate a pack with the identical set of
objects, then, but somehow different in its pack parameters (perhaps
turning off deltas?).
-Peff
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
