On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 3:11 PM, Avery Pennarun [off-list ref] wrote:
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 6:06 PM, Chris Packham [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
They're showing up with 'gitk --all'. I've made a backup so I can
expire the reflog and see if they go away.
gitk --all shouldn't be showing stuff just because it's in the reflog.
Does it have a branchname tag next to it? Have you exit/restarted
gitk or are you just using its refresh button? The latter doesn't
work very well across branch deletion.
Avery
The commits do have tags. I'll try deleting them and gc'ing again.
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 3:18 PM, Chris Packham [off-list ref] wrote:
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 3:11 PM, Avery Pennarun [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 6:06 PM, Chris Packham [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
They're showing up with 'gitk --all'. I've made a backup so I can
expire the reflog and see if they go away.
gitk --all shouldn't be showing stuff just because it's in the reflog.
Does it have a branchname tag next to it? Have you exit/restarted
gitk or are you just using its refresh button? The latter doesn't
work very well across branch deletion.
Avery
The commits do have tags. I'll try deleting them and gc'ing again.
Deleting the tags seemed to do the trick as far as removing the
detached commits in gitk.
Now git gc seems to be stuck
~/linux> git --version
git version 1.7.1
~/linux> git gc
Counting objects: 20058 (went away made a coffee, came back still
stuck at 20058)
I've attached with gdb and have the following trace if its of any use
(sorry I don't have debug symbols for libz). I've still got the
debugger attached if anyone wants me to dump out anything else.
[Switching to Thread 0xb759e6c0 (LWP 7731)]
0xb7898685 in ?? () from /lib/libz.so.1
(gdb) bt
#0 0xb7898685 in ?? () from /lib/libz.so.1
#1 0xb7898f99 in ?? () from /lib/libz.so.1
#2 0xb7895ccc in ?? () from /lib/libz.so.1
#3 0xb7895ff8 in deflate () from /lib/libz.so.1
#4 0x080f5ade in write_loose_object (sha1=<value optimized out>,
hdr=<value optimized out>, hdrlen=<value optimized out>,
buf=0x8248570, len=1170, mtime=1274994118) at sha1_file.c:2314
#5 0x080f6c09 in force_object_loose (sha1=0xb64ed204
"»²D\v\030\005ªn\fØÂ\026\201\037EªÞãc{²JõØ`º\214\020IvæÐ`Æ0\2113\222ÿ»²R\rdZ;#q\f?\001ü\201#ZXr·»²U¯Jl²\to\022¬³\004\035\215Õd0|z»²[çÝþaD2Ê\206'ºL¾y\037WÕi»²^©§Ê\024H\025\003\200\006?\003L=\001¯?²dòäÒ\223Úc\234\202\224ÍfcpOì8?l\0226\021~óxTç¼y.iN¾¡\036»²\212·Y\227\211t\v\"3
\200]\"®û\227õ3»²¢\024Té«>\212.¡a@b'Ü[Ò=4"..., mtime=1274994118) at
sha1_file.c:2377
#6 0x08089d8d in get_object_list (ac=<value optimized out>, av=<value
optimized out>) at builtin/pack-objects.c:2050
#7 0x0808c4e6 in cmd_pack_objects (argc=10, argv=0xbfb43118,
prefix=0x0) at builtin/pack-objects.c:2317
#8 0x0804b42b in handle_internal_command (argc=<value optimized out>,
argv=<value optimized out>) at git.c:260
#9 0x0804b5fe in main (argc=10, argv=0xbfb43118) at git.c:458
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 3:57 PM, Chris Packham [off-list ref] wrote:
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 3:18 PM, Chris Packham [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 3:11 PM, Avery Pennarun [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 6:06 PM, Chris Packham [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
They're showing up with 'gitk --all'. I've made a backup so I can
expire the reflog and see if they go away.
gitk --all shouldn't be showing stuff just because it's in the reflog.
Does it have a branchname tag next to it? Have you exit/restarted
gitk or are you just using its refresh button? The latter doesn't
work very well across branch deletion.
Avery
The commits do have tags. I'll try deleting them and gc'ing again.
Deleting the tags seemed to do the trick as far as removing the
detached commits in gitk.
Now git gc seems to be stuck
~/linux> git --version
git version 1.7.1
~/linux> git gc
Counting objects: 20058 (went away made a coffee, came back still
stuck at 20058)
I've attached with gdb and have the following trace if its of any use
(sorry I don't have debug symbols for libz). I've still got the
debugger attached if anyone wants me to dump out anything else.
Looks like its come back now. I guess there was just one object that
was taking a while to pack.