Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] cat-file --textconv/--filters: allow specifying the path separately

Johannes Schindelin writes: > However, I do not want to hold this patch series up just by being > stubborn. Peff and I disussed this further in the thread in which the message appears, and agreed that it does not matter

Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] cat-file --textconv/--filters: allow specifying the path separately

Hi Junio, On Wed, 24 Aug 2016, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Junio C Hamano writes: > > > Mentioned elsewhere, but I think the above should be > > > > if (!path) > > path = obj_context.path; > > > > if (obj_context.mode == S_IFINVALID) > >

Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] cat-file --textconv/--filters: allow specifying the path separately

Junio C Hamano writes: > Mentioned elsewhere, but I think the above should be > > if (!path) > path = obj_context.path; > > if (obj_context.mode == S_IFINVALID) > obj_context.mode = 0100644; > > IOW, even when there is an explicit path

Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] cat-file --textconv/--filters: allow specifying the path separately

Johannes Schindelin writes: > @@ -65,6 +68,11 @@ static int cat_one_file(int opt, const char *exp_type, > const char *obj_name, > if (get_sha1_with_context(obj_name, 0, sha1, _context)) > die("Not a valid object name %s", obj_name); > > + if

[PATCH v2 3/4] cat-file --textconv/--filters: allow specifying the path separately

There are circumstances when it is relatively easy to figure out the object name for a given path, but not the name of the containing tree. For example, when looking at a diff generated by Git, the object names are recorded, but not the revision. As a matter of fact, the revisions from which the