On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 09:45:47AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> writes:
> > David Aguilar <dav...@gmail.com> writes:
> >
> >>> The implementation of Junio's suggestion is relatively straightforward
> >>> (this is untested, although t7800 passes, and can probably be improved
> >>> by someone better versed in Perl).  Does this work for your original
> >>> scenario?
> >>
> >> This is a nice straightforward approach.
> >>
> >> As Junio mentioned, a good next step would be this patch in
> >> combination with making the truly temporary files created by
> >> dir-diff readonly.
> >
> > Even though I agree that the idea Matt McClure mentioned to run a
> > three-way merge to take the modification back when the path checked
> > out to the temporary tree as a temporary file (because it does not
> > match the working tree version) gets edited by the user might be a
> > better longer-term direction to go, marking the temporaries that the
> > users should not modify clearly as such needs to be done in the
> > shorter term.  This thread wouldn't have had to happen if we had
> > such a safety measure in the first place.
> One thing I forgot to add.  I suspect the patch in the thread will
> not work if the path needs smudge filter and end-of-line conversion,
> as it seems to just hash-object what is in the working tree (which
> should be _after_ these transformations) and compare with the object
> name.  The comparison should go the other way around.  Try to check
> out the object with these transformations applied, and compare the
> resulting file with what is in the working tree.

git-hash-object(1) implies that it will apply the clean filter and EOL
conversion when it's given a path to a file in the working tree (as it
is here).  Is that not the case?

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to