From 6fc686c45fd8af8117db23ed5989de2db780262e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: "https://me.yahoo.com/a/FHnTlSBo1eCGJRwueeKeB6.RCaPbGMPr5jxx8A--#ce0d8" Date: Sun, 6 Sep 2015 10:50:46 +0000 Subject: [PATCH 1/5] --- doc/forum/How_to_define_a_balanced_prefered_content.mdwn | 5 +++++ 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+) create mode 100644 doc/forum/How_to_define_a_balanced_prefered_content.mdwn diff --git a/doc/forum/How_to_define_a_balanced_prefered_content.mdwn b/doc/forum/How_to_define_a_balanced_prefered_content.mdwn new file mode 100644 index 0000000000..1bfbe848b9 --- /dev/null +++ b/doc/forum/How_to_define_a_balanced_prefered_content.mdwn @@ -0,0 +1,5 @@ +I have 6 drives attached to my box and I am trying to split them in to 2 groups I would like to have 2 balanced groups [1] so each file lands on two of these disks. So assuming i have disks A B C D E F, I want to create two balanced groups A B C and D E F. But I can not figure out how to defined rules using balanced_amoung(group) expression in vicfg. The only place it allows me to use the expression is the group section but how do i define a group that uses a balanced group. + + + +[1] https://git-annex.branchable.com/design/balanced_preferred_content/ From f1dcc0dd0957687332b269d87efae0286df4bea6 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: lealanko Date: Sun, 6 Sep 2015 12:46:13 +0000 Subject: [PATCH 2/5] --- ...ismatch_between_symlinks_and_annex_objects.mdwn | 14 ++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+) create mode 100644 doc/forum/Layout_mismatch_between_symlinks_and_annex_objects.mdwn diff --git a/doc/forum/Layout_mismatch_between_symlinks_and_annex_objects.mdwn b/doc/forum/Layout_mismatch_between_symlinks_and_annex_objects.mdwn new file mode 100644 index 0000000000..fe9167e975 --- /dev/null +++ b/doc/forum/Layout_mismatch_between_symlinks_and_annex_objects.mdwn @@ -0,0 +1,14 @@ +I have an old repository, and I'm not sure what I have done with it, but it seems to be broken in an interesting fashion. + + $ ls -l pix/image001.jpg + lrwxrwxrwx 1 la la 187 Sep 5 11:31 pix/image001.jpg -> ../.git/annex/objects/G7/J7/SHA256-s99372--0458b0b72b394a719b72032971b880a8dfafa65e8048ec6fc6c861fc3ea5e702/SHA256-s99372--0458b0b72b394a719b72032971b880a8dfafa65e8048ec6fc6c861fc3ea5e702 + $ ls -lL pix/image001.jpg + ls: cannot access pix/image001.jpg: No such file or directory + $ find .git/annex/objects/ -type f -name '*0458b0b72*' + .git/annex/objects/477/75c/SHA256-s99372--0458b0b72b394a719b72032971b880a8dfafa65e8048ec6fc6c861fc3ea5e702/SHA256-s99372--0458b0b72b394a719b72032971b880a8dfafa65e8048ec6fc6c861fc3ea5e702 + $ git config annex.version + 5 + +So the symlinks use a layout where index directories have two-letter names, but the actual layout in the annex uses directory names with three hexadecimal digits. + +Is there some straightforward way to fix this or do I need to figure the index format and hack up a script to convert the annex repository? From 164eb2fbae4f3b9778719f7708bd2b095f1fd701 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: lealanko Date: Sun, 6 Sep 2015 13:11:44 +0000 Subject: [PATCH 3/5] Added a comment --- .../comment_1_854786810dc4246cdaa38ff10c55bbca._comment | 9 +++++++++ 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+) create mode 100644 doc/forum/Layout_mismatch_between_symlinks_and_annex_objects/comment_1_854786810dc4246cdaa38ff10c55bbca._comment diff --git a/doc/forum/Layout_mismatch_between_symlinks_and_annex_objects/comment_1_854786810dc4246cdaa38ff10c55bbca._comment b/doc/forum/Layout_mismatch_between_symlinks_and_annex_objects/comment_1_854786810dc4246cdaa38ff10c55bbca._comment new file mode 100644 index 0000000000..d4565f25b6 --- /dev/null +++ b/doc/forum/Layout_mismatch_between_symlinks_and_annex_objects/comment_1_854786810dc4246cdaa38ff10c55bbca._comment @@ -0,0 +1,9 @@ +[[!comment format=mdwn + username="lealanko" + subject="comment 1" + date="2015-09-06T13:11:44Z" + content=""" +I think I figured it out: the repository was originally [[bare|bare repositories]], and I converted it to non-bare manually. But that doesn't work, because bare annex repositories use [[a different directory layout|internals/hashing]]. + +I can understand why the hex-based layout is preferred (it's more portable), but deliberate incompatibility with the symlinks isn't very nice. I wish there was a way to upgrade the entire repository to a format that used the hex paths for symlinks, so bare and non-bare repositories used the same layout. +"""]] From 8733bd603d353d589749284d6198036e6954166d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: lealanko Date: Sun, 6 Sep 2015 13:26:49 +0000 Subject: [PATCH 4/5] Added a comment --- .../comment_5_90aacf46abdeab34ec8e402613da679d._comment | 9 +++++++++ 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+) create mode 100644 doc/todo/wishlist:_use_hardlinks_for_local_clones/comment_5_90aacf46abdeab34ec8e402613da679d._comment diff --git a/doc/todo/wishlist:_use_hardlinks_for_local_clones/comment_5_90aacf46abdeab34ec8e402613da679d._comment b/doc/todo/wishlist:_use_hardlinks_for_local_clones/comment_5_90aacf46abdeab34ec8e402613da679d._comment new file mode 100644 index 0000000000..0aa945f6b2 --- /dev/null +++ b/doc/todo/wishlist:_use_hardlinks_for_local_clones/comment_5_90aacf46abdeab34ec8e402613da679d._comment @@ -0,0 +1,9 @@ +[[!comment format=mdwn + username="lealanko" + subject="comment 5" + date="2015-09-06T13:26:49Z" + content=""" +> you can \"git clone --shared\" and this will set up a clone of a repository in which git-annex will use hardlinks + +Copying files from the shared origin repository to the clone will create a hardlink, yes. But copying a file from the clone to the origin will still create a physical copy, even though the situation is quite comparable. Could hardlink support be added in this direction as well? +"""]] From 499719d660cc251a7c6cc5479d8639562786d85d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: lealanko Date: Sun, 6 Sep 2015 14:00:39 +0000 Subject: [PATCH 5/5] --- doc/todo/wishlist:_matching_options_for_branches.mdwn | 1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) create mode 100644 doc/todo/wishlist:_matching_options_for_branches.mdwn diff --git a/doc/todo/wishlist:_matching_options_for_branches.mdwn b/doc/todo/wishlist:_matching_options_for_branches.mdwn new file mode 100644 index 0000000000..03086e0f92 --- /dev/null +++ b/doc/todo/wishlist:_matching_options_for_branches.mdwn @@ -0,0 +1 @@ +I have a repository layout where I have multiple unrelated branches in a single repository. Different branches have different policies regarding where their content should be replicated. It would be nice to be able to reflect this with git-annex's matching and preferred content options, but currently there seems to be no way to say "include/exclude files referred to in these branches".