@@ -388,15 +388,23 @@ static int has_pack_ext(const struct generated_pack_data *data,
}
static void repack_promisor_objects(const struct pack_objects_args *args,
- struct string_list *names)
+ struct string_list *names,
+ struct string_list *keep_pack_list)
{
struct child_process cmd = CHILD_PROCESS_INIT;
FILE *out;
struct strbuf line = STRBUF_INIT;
+ int i;
prepare_pack_objects(&cmd, args, packtmp);
cmd.in = -1;
+ if (!pack_kept_objects)
+ strvec_push(&cmd.args, "--honor-pack-keep");
+ for (i = 0; i < keep_pack_list->nr; i++)
+ strvec_pushf(&cmd.args, "--keep-pack=%s",
+ keep_pack_list->items[i].string);
+
/*
* NEEDSWORK: Giving pack-objects only the OIDs without any ordering
* hints may result in suboptimal deltas in the resulting pack. See if
@@ -1350,7 +1358,7 @@ int cmd_repack(int argc,
strvec_push(&cmd.args, "--delta-islands");
if (pack_everything & ALL_INTO_ONE) {
- repack_promisor_objects(&po_args, &names);
+ repack_promisor_objects(&po_args, &names, &keep_pack_list);
if (has_existing_non_kept_packs(&existing) &&
delete_redundant &&
git-repack currently does not pass --keep-pack or --honor-pack-keep to the git-pack-objects handling promisor packs. This means that settings like gc.bigPackThreshold are completely ignored for promisor packs. The simple fix is to just copy the keep-pack logic into repack_promisor_objects(), although this could possibly be improved by making prepare_pack_objects() handle it instead. Signed-off-by: Tomáš Trnka <trnka@scm.com> --- RFC: This probably needs a test, but where and how should it be implemented? Perhaps in t7700-repack.sh, copying one of the tests using prepare_for_keep_packs and just touching .promisor files? Or instead in t/t0410-partial-clone.sh using a copy/variant of one of the basic repack tests there? builtin/repack.c | 12 ++++++++++-- 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) base-commit: 92999a42db1c5f43f330e4f2bca4026b5b81576f