Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] docs/git-clone: clarify use of --no-hardlinks option

From: Junio C Hamano <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2014 16:20:23 -0800

"Albert L. Lash, IV" <[email-masked]> writes:

> Current text claims optimization, implying the use of
> hardlinks, when this option ratchets down the level of
> efficiency. This change explains the difference made by
> using this option, namely copying instead of hardlinking,
> and why it may be useful.
>
> Signed-off-by: Albert L. Lash, IV <[email-masked]>
> ---
>  Documentation/git-clone.txt | 11 ++++-------
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/git-clone.txt b/Documentation/git-clone.txt
> index bf3dac0..0363d00 100644
> --- a/Documentation/git-clone.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/git-clone.txt
> @@ -55,15 +55,12 @@ repository is specified as a URL, then this flag is ignored (and we
>  never use the local optimizations).  Specifying `--no-local` will
>  override the default when `/path/to/repo` is given, using the regular
>  Git transport instead.
> -+
> -To force copying instead of hardlinking (which may be desirable if you
> -are trying to make a back-up of your repository), but still avoid the
> -usual "Git aware" transport mechanism, `--no-hardlinks` can be used.
>  
>  --no-hardlinks::
> -	Optimize the cloning process from a repository on a
> -	local filesystem by copying files under `.git/objects`
> -	directory.
> +	Force the cloning process from a repository on a local
> +	filesystem to copy the files under the `.git/objects`
> +	directory instead of using hardlinks. This may be desirable
> +	if you are trying to make a back-up of your repository.

Makes sense, and it is kind of embarrassing (I have to suspect that
this was originally the description of "--hardlinks" option).

[PATCH {1,2}/4] looked trivially correct, too.

Thanks.