[darcs-users] some darcs comments from Johan Tibell

Trent W. Buck twb at cybersource.com.au
Mon Jan 4 06:45:09 UTC 2010

Eric Kow <kowey at darcs.net> writes:

> But for larger projects, I tend to have a single directory just for that
> project
> darcs-hacking/unstable
> darcs-hacking/kowey
> darcs-hacking/review-291
> (so cd darcs-hacking; darcs get --lazy http://darcs.net review-291)

It would probably be more efficient (in terms of I/O, but not typing) to
say something like:

    darcs get --lazy unstable review-291
    # Now change the default push/pull repo...
    darcs pull --set-defaults --repo review-291 http://darcs.net

If your cache is seeded, this ought to be about as good:

    darcs get --lazy http://darcs.net review-291
    darcs optimize --relink --repo review-291 --sibling unstable

>> > fs runs Fedora Core 3 and has two SATA disks in a software RAID 1 array.
>> > I can only assume that when people complain about slow branch creation
>> >
>> >     - they're *really* impatient;
>> >     - they're using NFS on 100baseT (like me);
>> This is on local disk.
> Trent: any ideas on what's going on here?  Is there some good reason
> for this sort of discrepancy if any?

Discrepancy between which two cases?  NFS is really slow for me due to
the horrible virtualization hacks that I have in place, and because NFS
has trouble with lots of small files (e.g. Maildir or _darcs/patches).

>> >     - they're not using --lazy for branches;
>> Aside: I want all my history locally so I don't use lazy.
> Even when branching an already local repo?  What's there to lose?

Simply this:

    darcs get --lazy branch1 branch1-second-attempt
    rm -rf branch1
    # Oops!  Potential data loss!

I have lazy on by default, and I very occasionally shoot myself in the
foot in such a manner -- usually when publishing a private repo using
"get" instead of "put".

> So would a good default be for darcs changes to always print out the
> patch-info hash for each patch?
> Thu Dec 24 11:34:44 GMT 2009  Joachim Breitner <mail at joachim-breitner.de>
> hash: 20091224113444-23c07-5bd7128afb3ad9a32c49e59f4f5fdfc5db05eb88
>   * Resolve issue1362: Mention repo name in mail send body

Or perhaps more generally, to make the patch format that Darcs displays
customizable?  Git has --pretty=foo and hg has --format=foo, for a few
pre-defined values of foo.  There's always "darcs changes --xml | xslt",
but that's a pain in the arse, and wouldn't affect e.g. the amend-record

More information about the darcs-users mailing list