On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 06:21:11PM +0700, Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy wrote:
> -     for (i = 0; i < specs; i++) {
> +     for (i = 0; i < pathspec->nr; i++) {
>               if (!seen[i])
> -                     die(_("pathspec '%s' did not match any files"), 
> pathspec[i]);
> +                     die(_("pathspec '%s' did not match any files"), 
> pathspec->raw[i]);
>       }

This needs the following fixup on top. I don't want to send another
reroll just a couple hours after I flooded git@vger. I did not plan to
work on the series this soon but somehow another problem got me back
here.

-- 8< --
diff --git a/builtin/add.c b/builtin/add.c
index 1235eb9..e1bcdb9 100644
--- a/builtin/add.c
+++ b/builtin/add.c
@@ -159,7 +159,8 @@ static void refresh(int verbose, const struct pathspec 
*pathspec)
                      pathspec, seen, _("Unstaged changes after refreshing the 
index:"));
        for (i = 0; i < pathspec->nr; i++) {
                if (!seen[i])
-                       die(_("pathspec '%s' did not match any files"), 
pathspec->raw[i]);
+                       die(_("pathspec '%s' did not match any files"),
+                           pathspec->items[i].match);
        }
         free(seen);
 }
-- 8< --

and the baaad reason: pathspec->items[] are sorted because of 86e4ca6
(tree_entry_interesting(): fix depth limit with overlapping pathspecs
- 2010-12-15). But raw[] are _not_. So raw[i] does not correspond to
item[i].

Now seen[] array returned from match_pathspec() has the order
corresponding to raw[]. On the other hand match_pathspec_depth()
returns seen[] corresponds to items[]. This patch converts
match_pathspec() to match_pathspec_depth() so we need to use the
correct pathspec array.

I'll put these explanation in the next reroll. And don't worry about
this subtle difference. My next email kills match_pathspec() for good.
--
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