"Phil Holmes" <[email protected]> writes: > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "David Kastrup" <[email protected]> > To: <[email protected]> > Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2012 5:41 PM > Subject: Re: Git help, please > > >> "Phil Holmes" <[email protected]> writes: >> >>> I have had a problem with this in the past, which is why I was >>> suggesting this route. I had an uncommitted file on my local machine >>> that wasn't in master. I'd not added it with commit -a or whatever, >>> and so my build was OK but patchy-staging fell over. I wanted to >>> avoid the possibility. >> >> git clone /my/repository /tmp/checkingplace >> >> cd /tmp/checkingplace >> test test test >> cd ~ >> rm -rf /tmp/checkingplace > > > Whilst I always appreciate yours and Graham's help, this has been an > absolute masterclass in "answering a question I didn't ask". I wasn't > looking to create an alternative clone, since I already have one in my > alternative user which I had been using for patchy.
A fresh clone will not ever contain an uncommitted file. So I don't think that this advice has been as nonsensically as you assume. > As a BTW - does cloning as above fetch the whole repo, or just > recreate it locally? "The repo" is your local repository, and the current branch of _that_ is cloned and checked out. -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
