From f724ff038816c9e4406261d7708ff22bdcdffd69 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Joey Hess Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2024 14:20:05 -0400 Subject: [PATCH] comment --- ..._b384a880f56dc9231233214b42e941a3._comment | 31 +++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 31 insertions(+) create mode 100644 doc/bugs/multiple_records_in_remote.log_for_the_same_remote/comment_2_b384a880f56dc9231233214b42e941a3._comment diff --git a/doc/bugs/multiple_records_in_remote.log_for_the_same_remote/comment_2_b384a880f56dc9231233214b42e941a3._comment b/doc/bugs/multiple_records_in_remote.log_for_the_same_remote/comment_2_b384a880f56dc9231233214b42e941a3._comment new file mode 100644 index 0000000000..d0c79795b1 --- /dev/null +++ b/doc/bugs/multiple_records_in_remote.log_for_the_same_remote/comment_2_b384a880f56dc9231233214b42e941a3._comment @@ -0,0 +1,31 @@ +[[!comment format=mdwn + username="joey" + subject="""comment 2""" + date="2024-11-14T17:57:56Z" + content=""" +Multiple names for the same uuid is easy to explain, if they ran `git-annex +renameremote`. Anyway, git-annex will use whichever of those configs for that +uuid has the latest timestamp. So not really a problem. And when the +remote.log gets compacted (as happened when you did "that dance"), the old +log entries get removed. + +Multiple uuids for the same name is also pretty easy to explain: +initremote can be run twice with the same name in different clones, +and so you then have two remotes upon merging. `git-annex enableremote` +does deal with this situation, failing with "Multiple remotes have that +name. Either use git-annex renameremote to rename them, or specify the uuid +of the remote." + +Here you didn't use enableremote though, but it autoenabled. Since both +remotes have autoenable set, I think what happened was whichever got +autoenabled second overwrote the git config of the one that got autoenabled +first. Here's how that looks: + + git-annex init + init (Auto enabling special remote foo...) + (Auto enabling special remote foo...) + ok + +Maybe autoenable could somehow handle that case better, but all I can think +of is a warning. +"""]]