Dear diary, on Fri, Apr 15, 2005 at 01:01:27AM CEST, I got a letter
where Martin Schlemmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> told me that...
> On Fri, 2005-04-15 at 00:42 +0200, Petr Baudis wrote:
> > Dear diary, on Thu, Apr 14, 2005 at 11:40:09AM CEST, I got a letter
> > where Martin Schlemmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> told me that...
> > > So basically the modes that are stored in the cache are not applied ...
> > > Although, yes, I prob should add the relevant code to checkout-cache.
> > This should be fixed now, BTW. git apply didn't correctly apply the
> > mode changes, but now it should. Several bugs prevented it to, in fact.
> > ;-)
> Yep, I saw - thought you scrapped this, so mailed a new patch (or was
> busy doing the touch ups to the email when this came in.
Hmm, I must've missed the new patch. The latest I have still puts the
stuff to update-cache and combines it with the show-diff change.
> > > > > show-diff.c: a531ca4078525d1c8dcf84aae0bfa89fed6e5d96
> > > > > --- a531ca4078525d1c8dcf84aae0bfa89fed6e5d96/show-diff.c
> > > > > +++ uncommitted/show-diff.c
> > > > > @@ -5,13 +5,18 @@
> > > > > - snprintf(cmd, sizeof(cmd), "diff -L %s -u -N - %s", name,
> > > > > name);
> > > > > + for (n = 0; n < 20; n++)
> > > > > + snprintf(&(sha1[n*2]), 3, "%02x", ce->sha1[n]);
> > > > > + snprintf(cmd, sizeof(cmd), "diff -L %s/%s -L uncommitted/%s
> > > > > -u -N - %s",
> > > > > + sha1, ce->name, ce->name, ce->name);
> > > >
> > > > The "directory" sha1 is the sha1 of the tree, not of the particular
> > > > file - that one is in the "attributes" list (parentheses after the
> > > > filename), together with mode.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Does it really matter? It is more just to get the patch prefix right,
> > > and I did it as it went nicely with the printed:
> > >
> > > ----
> > > show-diff.c: a531ca4078525d1c8dcf84aae0bfa89fed6e5d96
> > > ----
> > >
> > > for example ...
> > Yes, it matters, and I don't care how nicely it wents with what you
> > print before.
> hah ;p
> > Either print there some nonsense which is clear not to be a tree ID, or
> > (much more preferably) print the real tree ID there. If some tool ever
> > uses it (e.g. to help resolve conflicts, perhaps even actually doing a
> > real merge based on the patch), you just confused it.
> Ok, understood. Do you think it will be scripted? If not I guess we
> can just do labels like:
> --- committed/
> +++ uncommitted/
Heh. Well, of course this could do. But is there any technical reason
why not just carry the sha1 id of the tree around and stuff it there?
Petr "Pasky" Baudis
C++: an octopus made by nailing extra legs onto a dog. -- Steve Taylor
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html