From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS53758 23.128.96.0/24 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.0 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A3CF1F4B4 for ; Thu, 15 Apr 2021 03:51:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229736AbhDODva (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Apr 2021 23:51:30 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com ([64.147.108.71]:56495 "EHLO pb-smtp2.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229449AbhDODv3 (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Apr 2021 23:51:29 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA1E4BAA02; Wed, 14 Apr 2021 23:51:05 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=/kp2YxRmQEJI1lr4KsjbLDVEa3g=; b=bZoRg8 HjlmZzE0GtHZqlzMVYzZOrQvc+oPSTF+MMbfO6I54fNb9AxCs0prdyOkK3dQpH6t eU7tuz3qhK7mnacSf6+GYpNgxGM3mc7O8vzIotoXw4h3Di0PkeMT6wz70LGz4CnW SbmMA4LAR9x48D9Aj8uheTk8OmsjrkRaf5Ass= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=njzJ9fQ1ZIT/R3igyspMP8P2hZ7dJO5F xR8+ura1BXc2mKWJU3+RlS043g6nuWubRsUyG7hLYKRM5LbaQyWgsjIb7PHOEdpJ 2D8QWARrTw1leHF8hhUtdqMeQ46AlYgfsf6muYk1UZuQ+TCmGkKU0yH4ZrU/k50n OlzbNmORhs8= Received: from pb-smtp2.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C9A13BA9FE; Wed, 14 Apr 2021 23:51:05 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.74.119.39]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B331CBA9FC; Wed, 14 Apr 2021 23:51:04 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Jonathan Tan Cc: rafaeloliveira.cs@gmail.com, git@vger.kernel.org, szeder.dev@gmail.com, peff@peff.net Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] repack: avoid loosening promisor pack objects in partial clones References: <20210414191403.4387-3-rafaeloliveira.cs@gmail.com> <20210415010454.4077355-1-jonathantanmy@google.com> Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2021 20:51:02 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20210415010454.4077355-1-jonathantanmy@google.com> (Jonathan Tan's message of "Wed, 14 Apr 2021 18:04:54 -0700") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: CD785C30-9D9D-11EB-A2E8-74DE23BA3BAF-77302942!pb-smtp2.pobox.com Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Jonathan Tan writes: >> When `-A` and `-d` are used together, besides packing all objects (-A) >> and removing redundant packs (-d), it also unpack all unreachable >> objects and deletes them by calling `git pruned-packed`. > > I still think of these objects as not unreachable, even though I know > that pack-objects calls them that (the argument is called > --unpack-unreachable). So I would say "it also loosens all objects that > were previously packed but did not go into the new pack", but perhaps > this is OK too. Hmph, that is puzzling. I understand that the operation about (1) finding all the objects that are still reachable and send them into a newly created pack, and (2) among the objects that were previously in the packs, eject those that weren't made into the new pack with the previous point. Where did I get it wrong? If all the reachable ones are dealt with with the first point, what is leftover is not reachable, no?