John,

I'm now able to clone the repo from windows following this commit:
https://github.com/openbsd/src/commit/6e49571c59fe1f1e78405e5a57a1e8dc40029e00

Two caveats:
1) if you wanted to bisect the repo on windows or checkout any earlier
commit than the one above, it won't be possible to do from windows.
you'd need to get on a different filesystem.
2) there's no guarantees someone doesn't commit something in the
future that's a problem (although hopefully chances are low of that
happening)

Here's how it looked on my end from windows, only a few regress
conflicts remain, but the checkout works now.

$ git clone https://github.com/openbsd/src.git
Cloning into 'src'...
remote: Enumerating objects: 137, done.
remote: Counting objects: 100% (137/137), done.
remote: Compressing objects: 100% (102/102), done.
remote: Total 1983701 (delta 53), reused 85 (delta 35), pack-reused 1983564
Receiving objects: 100% (1983701/1983701), 1.14 GiB | 9.48 MiB/s, done.
Resolving deltas: 100% (1579758/1579758), done.
Updating files: 100% (89835/89835), done.
warning: the following paths have collided (e.g. case-sensitive paths
on a case-insensitive filesystem) and only one from the same
colliding group is in the working tree:

  'regress/usr.bin/jot/regress.wDn.out'
  'regress/usr.bin/jot/regress.wdn.out'
  'regress/usr.bin/jot/regress.wO.out'
  'regress/usr.bin/jot/regress.wo.out'
  'regress/usr.bin/jot/regress.wU.out'
  'regress/usr.bin/jot/regress.wu.out'
  'regress/usr.bin/mandoc/roff/esc/O.in'
  'regress/usr.bin/mandoc/roff/esc/o.in'
  'regress/usr.bin/mandoc/roff/esc/O.out_ascii'
  'regress/usr.bin/mandoc/roff/esc/o.out_ascii'
  'regress/usr.bin/rcs/rcs-Aflag.out'
  'regress/usr.bin/rcs/rcs-aflag.out'


On Fri, Dec 11, 2020 at 1:58 PM <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> I would like to be able to clone the github mirror on windows.  I do
> wind up
> using 7z on the tar file as a workaround, but it would be nice if github
> "just worked".  The com files is what the clone fails on, and those
> seemed
> easy enough to address, but if it is actually a deep rat hole, I
> certainly
> understand.
>

Reply via email to