On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 10:09 AM, Bernie Innocenti <ber...@codewiz.org> wrote: > El Wed, 18-11-2009 a las 07:13 -0800, H.J. Lu escribió: >> On Sun, Nov 15, 2009 at 4:32 PM, Bernie Innocenti <ber...@codewiz.org> wrote: >> > I repacked our (un)official git mirror (http://gcc.gnu.org/git) with >> > >> > git repack -a -d -f --window=100 --depth=100 --window-memory=2g >> > >> > The pack is now 600MB, which is a bit scary, but still manageable. >> > Mysteriously, cloning this repo yields a smaller pack of just 519MB, >> > which still contains all the branches. It was probably caused by entries >> > in the reflog, which I have now disabled. >> > >> > As an additional bonus, I've added refs for all the current branches tom >> > make them visible in gitweb and easier to clone. >> >> Most of vendor branches are wrong. For example, there are many branches >> under branches/redhat. But I only see one redhat branch in git. > > I guess git-svn does not cope automatically with nested subdirs in > banches/.
If nested subdirs in banches/ aren't handled properly, shouldn't we avoid putting them in git mirror? > One could manually select them by passing multiple --branches options. > For our case, the man page shows how to map those branches to separate > namespaces: > > branches = stable/*:refs/remotes/svn/stable/* > branches = debug/*:refs/remotes/svn/debug/* > > > Properly handling vendor branches would be a requisite step for a real > migration to git. For now, I'd rather be lazy and delay this work until > someone asks for it. > > >> BTW, I can't pull new changes from the new master into my local git branches >> which are based on the old master. > > This is unexpected. Repacking doesn't change any SHA1, and I haven't > touched any of the existing branches. What error do you get from pull? > Oops. Pilot error. -- H.J.
