{"thread":{"id":"16923","subject":"RE: is there an easier way to do this ? [Scanned]","startedAt":"2008-12-30T04:00:53Z","lastAt":"2008-12-30T11:01:54Z","messageCount":5,"participants":["Conor Rafferty","Jacob Helwig","Zorba","Jeff Whiteside"],"isPatch":false,"patchVersion":null,"patchTotal":null},"messages":[{"id":"98940","messageId":"BB5F02FD3789B54E8964D38D6775E718242D1B@ALTMORE-SVR.altmore.local","threadId":"16923","inReplyTo":null,"subject":"RE: is there an easier way to do this ? [Scanned]","fromName":"Conor Rafferty","fromEmail":"conor.rafferty@altmore.co.uk","sentAt":null,"receivedAt":"2008-12-30T04:00:53Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"conor.rafferty@altmore.co.uk","avatar":null},"body":"Ah, but what about the files that have been removed from this version ?\n- that's the whole point of doing commit -a, so I don't have to spend\nages doing diffs to produce a list of files to feed into git-rm\n\nOr have I missed another glarer ?\n\n-----Original Message-----\nFrom: Jacob Helwig [mailto:jacob.helwig@gmail.com]\nSent: 30 December 2008 04:01\nTo: git@vger.kernel.org\nCc: Conor Rafferty\nSubject: Re: is there an easier way to do this ? [Scanned]\n\nOn Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 19:51, Zorba wrote:\n> The manual shows you can SHOW untracked files, but not add them as \n> part of the commit -a jig\n>\n> Seems a bit strange that git-add operates on both exisging and new \n> files when used standalone, but its behaviour changes when \n> encapsulated in commit -a...\n>\n> So, I thought maybe $ git commit -a, then $ git add .\n> but then the files tracked have missed the commit boat they were meant\n\n> to be on, haven't they,\n>\n> hang on -\n> what about\n>\n> $ git add .\n> $ git commit -a\n>\n> I do believe I've cracked it\n> if so, it seems a bit wasteful, 2x adds (one explicti and one embedded\n\n> in -a) ? shame on you linux kernel guys, i'd have expected better :-)\n>\n> \"Zorba\" wrote in message \n> news:gjc52u$ehc$4@ger.gmane.org...\n>> ok, now I'm in this for real, archiving versions of our website \n>> project (5k files approx)\n>>\n>> so here is the workflow:\n>>\n>> - copy version 1 files into GIT dir\n>>\n>> - open git bash\n>>\n>> $ git init\n>>\n>> $ git add .\n>>\n>> $ git commit -m \"version1\"\n>>\n>> all vanilla ? cool\n>> next job = store version 2, so delete version 1 files from GIT dir, \n>> copy in version 2\n>> version2 has different files from 1 - which ones? Out of 5k files \n>> could be 1% = 50 new ones, and same amount removed. Why should I \n>> care, with such a powerful friend as git around, n'est pas?\n>> THIS TIME we are going to be CLEVER and use \"-a\" flag on commit to \n>> pick up any files that have been REMOVED (or \"deleted\" in git-speak)\n>>\n>> $ git commit -a -m \"version2\"\n>>\n>> BUT this does not pick up any new ones that have been added,\n>>\n>> and when we run\n>>\n>> $ git status > ../git_status.txt\n>>\n>> these are referred to as \"untracked files\"\n>> only problem there are 50 ish\n>> is there not another flag on git commit to treat any untracked file \n>> as a new file ?\n>> (would save me typing or creating a list out of these untracked ones \n>> and feeding them into git add)\n>>\n>> I know, I realise now I should have looked up git-commit in the \n>> manual - in case its not there, pls enlighten me !\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>\n>\n>\n> --\n> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line \"unsubscribe git\" in the \n> body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at \n> http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html\n>\n\nIf you do an explicit git add, then you don't need the -a on git commit,\nsince everything you want to commit will already be in the index for git\ncommit to work with.\n"},{"id":"98941","messageId":"8c9a060812292017m600ca246pf8660630d49a7067@mail.gmail.com","threadId":"16923","inReplyTo":"BB5F02FD3789B54E8964D38D6775E718242D1B@ALTMORE-SVR.altmore.local","subject":"Re: is there an easier way to do this ? [Scanned]","fromName":"Jacob Helwig","fromEmail":"jacob.helwig@gmail.com","sentAt":"2008-12-30T04:17:30Z","receivedAt":"2008-12-30T04:17:30Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"jacob.helwig@gmail.com","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/14557?v=4"},"body":"On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 20:11, Conor Rafferty\n wrote:\n> Ah, but what about the files that have been removed from this version ?\n> - that's the whole point of doing commit -a, so I don't have to spend\n> ages doing diffs to produce a list of files to feed into git-rm\n>\n> Or have I missed another glarer ?\n>\n> -----Original Message-----\n> From: Jacob Helwig [mailto:jacob.helwig@gmail.com]\n> Sent: 30 December 2008 04:01\n> To: git@vger.kernel.org\n> Cc: Conor Rafferty\n> Subject: Re: is there an easier way to do this ? [Scanned]\n>\n> On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 19:51, Zorba wrote:\n>> The manual shows you can SHOW untracked files, but not add them as\n>> part of the commit -a jig\n>>\n>> Seems a bit strange that git-add operates on both exisging and new\n>> files when used standalone, but its behaviour changes when\n>> encapsulated in commit -a...\n>>\n>> So, I thought maybe $ git commit -a, then $ git add .\n>> but then the files tracked have missed the commit boat they were meant\n>\n>> to be on, haven't they,\n>>\n>> hang on -\n>> what about\n>>\n>> $ git add .\n>> $ git commit -a\n>>\n>> I do believe I've cracked it\n>> if so, it seems a bit wasteful, 2x adds (one explicti and one embedded\n>\n>> in -a) ? shame on you linux kernel guys, i'd have expected better :-)\n>>\n>> \"Zorba\" wrote in message\n>> news:gjc52u$ehc$4@ger.gmane.org...\n>>> ok, now I'm in this for real, archiving versions of our website\n>>> project (5k files approx)\n>>>\n>>> so here is the workflow:\n>>>\n>>> - copy version 1 files into GIT dir\n>>>\n>>> - open git bash\n>>>\n>>> $ git init\n>>>\n>>> $ git add .\n>>>\n>>> $ git commit -m \"version1\"\n>>>\n>>> all vanilla ? cool\n>>> next job = store version 2, so delete version 1 files from GIT dir,\n>>> copy in version 2\n>>> version2 has different files from 1 - which ones? Out of 5k files\n>>> could be 1% = 50 new ones, and same amount removed. Why should I\n>>> care, with such a powerful friend as git around, n'est pas?\n>>> THIS TIME we are going to be CLEVER and use \"-a\" flag on commit to\n>>> pick up any files that have been REMOVED (or \"deleted\" in git-speak)\n>>>\n>>> $ git commit -a -m \"version2\"\n>>>\n>>> BUT this does not pick up any new ones that have been added,\n>>>\n>>> and when we run\n>>>\n>>> $ git status > ../git_status.txt\n>>>\n>>> these are referred to as \"untracked files\"\n>>> only problem there are 50 ish\n>>> is there not another flag on git commit to treat any untracked file\n>>> as a new file ?\n>>> (would save me typing or creating a list out of these untracked ones\n>>> and feeding them into git add)\n>>>\n>>> I know, I realise now I should have looked up git-commit in the\n>>> manual - in case its not there, pls enlighten me !\n>>>\n>>>\n>>>\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>> --\n>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line \"unsubscribe git\" in the\n>> body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at\n>> http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html\n>>\n>\n> If you do an explicit git add, then you don't need the -a on git commit,\n> since everything you want to commit will already be in the index for git\n> commit to work with.\n>\n\nSee the -A flag for git add (and it's reference to --update). -A will\nremove files that have been removed, add untracked, and update ones\nthat have changed, all in one go.\n"},{"id":"98944","messageId":"gjc83i$juc$4@ger.gmane.org","threadId":"16923","inReplyTo":"8c9a060812292017m600ca246pf8660630d49a7067@mail.gmail.com","subject":"Re: is there an easier way to do this ? [Scanned]","fromName":"Zorba","fromEmail":"cr@altmore.co.uk","sentAt":null,"receivedAt":"2008-12-30T04:26:49Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"cr@altmore.co.uk","avatar":null},"body":"(punches air with fist)\nyes indeed !\n\nsorry, I didn't follow up on the --update flag first time\n\n$ git add -A .\n$ git commit\n\nhome in a boat!\n\n\"Jacob Helwig\" wrote in message \nnews:8c9a060812292017m600ca246pf8660630d49a7067@mail.gmail.com...\n> On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 20:11, Conor Rafferty\n> wrote:\n>> Ah, but what about the files that have been removed from this version ?\n>> - that's the whole point of doing commit -a, so I don't have to spend\n>> ages doing diffs to produce a list of files to feed into git-rm\n>>\n>> Or have I missed another glarer ?\n>>\n>> -----Original Message-----\n>> From: Jacob Helwig [mailto:jacob.helwig@gmail.com]\n>> Sent: 30 December 2008 04:01\n>> To: git@vger.kernel.org\n>> Cc: Conor Rafferty\n>> Subject: Re: is there an easier way to do this ? [Scanned]\n>>\n>> On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 19:51, Zorba wrote:\n>>> The manual shows you can SHOW untracked files, but not add them as\n>>> part of the commit -a jig\n>>>\n>>> Seems a bit strange that git-add operates on both exisging and new\n>>> files when used standalone, but its behaviour changes when\n>>> encapsulated in commit -a...\n>>>\n>>> So, I thought maybe $ git commit -a, then $ git add .\n>>> but then the files tracked have missed the commit boat they were meant\n>>\n>>> to be on, haven't they,\n>>>\n>>> hang on -\n>>> what about\n>>>\n>>> $ git add .\n>>> $ git commit -a\n>>>\n>>> I do believe I've cracked it\n>>> if so, it seems a bit wasteful, 2x adds (one explicti and one embedded\n>>\n>>> in -a) ? shame on you linux kernel guys, i'd have expected better :-)\n>>>\n>>> \"Zorba\" wrote in message\n>>> news:gjc52u$ehc$4@ger.gmane.org...\n>>>> ok, now I'm in this for real, archiving versions of our website\n>>>> project (5k files approx)\n>>>>\n>>>> so here is the workflow:\n>>>>\n>>>> - copy version 1 files into GIT dir\n>>>>\n>>>> - open git bash\n>>>>\n>>>> $ git init\n>>>>\n>>>> $ git add .\n>>>>\n>>>> $ git commit -m \"version1\"\n>>>>\n>>>> all vanilla ? cool\n>>>> next job = store version 2, so delete version 1 files from GIT dir,\n>>>> copy in version 2\n>>>> version2 has different files from 1 - which ones? Out of 5k files\n>>>> could be 1% = 50 new ones, and same amount removed. Why should I\n>>>> care, with such a powerful friend as git around, n'est pas?\n>>>> THIS TIME we are going to be CLEVER and use \"-a\" flag on commit to\n>>>> pick up any files that have been REMOVED (or \"deleted\" in git-speak)\n>>>>\n>>>> $ git commit -a -m \"version2\"\n>>>>\n>>>> BUT this does not pick up any new ones that have been added,\n>>>>\n>>>> and when we run\n>>>>\n>>>> $ git status > ../git_status.txt\n>>>>\n>>>> these are referred to as \"untracked files\"\n>>>> only problem there are 50 ish\n>>>> is there not another flag on git commit to treat any untracked file\n>>>> as a new file ?\n>>>> (would save me typing or creating a list out of these untracked ones\n>>>> and feeding them into git add)\n>>>>\n>>>> I know, I realise now I should have looked up git-commit in the\n>>>> manual - in case its not there, pls enlighten me !\n>>>>\n>>>>\n>>>>\n>>>\n>>>\n>>>\n>>> --\n>>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line \"unsubscribe git\" in the\n>>> body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at\n>>> http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html\n>>>\n>>\n>> If you do an explicit git add, then you don't need the -a on git commit,\n>> since everything you want to commit will already be in the index for git\n>> commit to work with.\n>>\n>\n> See the -A flag for git add (and it's reference to --update). -A will\n> remove files that have been removed, add untracked, and update ones\n> that have changed, all in one go. \n"},{"id":"98947","messageId":"3ab397d0812292132h6ffe7e49o650fbf35588666db@mail.gmail.com","threadId":"16923","inReplyTo":"gjc83i$juc$4@ger.gmane.org","subject":"Re: is there an easier way to do this ? [Scanned]","fromName":"Jeff Whiteside","fromEmail":"jeff.m.whiteside@gmail.com","sentAt":"2008-12-30T05:32:12Z","receivedAt":"2008-12-30T05:32:12Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"jeff.m.whiteside@gmail.com","avatar":null},"body":"you should reply to the original thread, so that you don't create a\nnew one. makes it almost impossible to find what you're referencing.\n\nalso, don't bother with git-rm. a simple rm is the same thing.\n(committing will notice that this file is gone)\n\nOn Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 8:29 PM, Zorba wrote:\n> (punches air with fist)\n> yes indeed !\n>\n> sorry, I didn't follow up on the --update flag first time\n>\n> $ git add -A .\n> $ git commit\n>\n> home in a boat!\n>\n> \"Jacob Helwig\" wrote in message\n> news:8c9a060812292017m600ca246pf8660630d49a7067@mail.gmail.com...\n>> On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 20:11, Conor Rafferty\n>> wrote:\n>>> Ah, but what about the files that have been removed from this version ?\n>>> - that's the whole point of doing commit -a, so I don't have to spend\n>>> ages doing diffs to produce a list of files to feed into git-rm\n>>>\n>>> Or have I missed another glarer ?\n>>>\n>>> -----Original Message-----\n>>> From: Jacob Helwig [mailto:jacob.helwig@gmail.com]\n>>> Sent: 30 December 2008 04:01\n>>> To: git@vger.kernel.org\n>>> Cc: Conor Rafferty\n>>> Subject: Re: is there an easier way to do this ? [Scanned]\n>>>\n>>> On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 19:51, Zorba wrote:\n>>>> The manual shows you can SHOW untracked files, but not add them as\n>>>> part of the commit -a jig\n>>>>\n>>>> Seems a bit strange that git-add operates on both exisging and new\n>>>> files when used standalone, but its behaviour changes when\n>>>> encapsulated in commit -a...\n>>>>\n>>>> So, I thought maybe $ git commit -a, then $ git add .\n>>>> but then the files tracked have missed the commit boat they were meant\n>>>\n>>>> to be on, haven't they,\n>>>>\n>>>> hang on -\n>>>> what about\n>>>>\n>>>> $ git add .\n>>>> $ git commit -a\n>>>>\n>>>> I do believe I've cracked it\n>>>> if so, it seems a bit wasteful, 2x adds (one explicti and one embedded\n>>>\n>>>> in -a) ? shame on you linux kernel guys, i'd have expected better :-)\n>>>>\n>>>> \"Zorba\" wrote in message\n>>>> news:gjc52u$ehc$4@ger.gmane.org...\n>>>>> ok, now I'm in this for real, archiving versions of our website\n>>>>> project (5k files approx)\n>>>>>\n>>>>> so here is the workflow:\n>>>>>\n>>>>> - copy version 1 files into GIT dir\n>>>>>\n>>>>> - open git bash\n>>>>>\n>>>>> $ git init\n>>>>>\n>>>>> $ git add .\n>>>>>\n>>>>> $ git commit -m \"version1\"\n>>>>>\n>>>>> all vanilla ? cool\n>>>>> next job = store version 2, so delete version 1 files from GIT dir,\n>>>>> copy in version 2\n>>>>> version2 has different files from 1 - which ones? Out of 5k files\n>>>>> could be 1% = 50 new ones, and same amount removed. Why should I\n>>>>> care, with such a powerful friend as git around, n'est pas?\n>>>>> THIS TIME we are going to be CLEVER and use \"-a\" flag on commit to\n>>>>> pick up any files that have been REMOVED (or \"deleted\" in git-speak)\n>>>>>\n>>>>> $ git commit -a -m \"version2\"\n>>>>>\n>>>>> BUT this does not pick up any new ones that have been added,\n>>>>>\n>>>>> and when we run\n>>>>>\n>>>>> $ git status > ../git_status.txt\n>>>>>\n>>>>> these are referred to as \"untracked files\"\n>>>>> only problem there are 50 ish\n>>>>> is there not another flag on git commit to treat any untracked file\n>>>>> as a new file ?\n>>>>> (would save me typing or creating a list out of these untracked ones\n>>>>> and feeding them into git add)\n>>>>>\n>>>>> I know, I realise now I should have looked up git-commit in the\n>>>>> manual - in case its not there, pls enlighten me !\n>>>>>\n>>>>>\n>>>>>\n>>>>\n>>>>\n>>>>\n>>>> --\n>>>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line \"unsubscribe git\" in the\n>>>> body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at\n>>>> http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html\n>>>>\n>>>\n>>> If you do an explicit git add, then you don't need the -a on git commit,\n>>> since everything you want to commit will already be in the index for git\n>>> commit to work with.\n>>>\n>>\n>> See the -A flag for git add (and it's reference to --update). -A will\n>> remove files that have been removed, add untracked, and update ones\n>> that have changed, all in one go.\n>\n>\n>\n> --\n> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line \"unsubscribe git\" in\n> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org\n> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html\n>\n"},{"id":"98961","messageId":"gjd2hv$c31$4@ger.gmane.org","threadId":"16923","inReplyTo":"3ab397d0812292132h6ffe7e49o650fbf35588666db@mail.gmail.com","subject":"Re: is there an easier way to do this ? [Scanned]","fromName":"Zorba","fromEmail":"cr@altmore.co.uk","sentAt":null,"receivedAt":"2008-12-30T11:01:54Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"cr@altmore.co.uk","avatar":null},"body":"Hi Jeff,\n\nThanks for that, and yes, I will be more careful with my postings. There is \nalready so much traffic on this list, the last thing anyone needs is more \nfragmentation.\n\nI'm so chuffed now that I got $ git add -A (don't even need the dot, i read \n!) $ git commit !\nThank you !\n\nI was up till 5:30am this morning working on this. Another in a series of \nlate nights. My partner stuck her head round the door at 4 and at 5 and \nlooked at me like I've flipped out (gone crazy). I think she's gonna try and \nget them to take me away, so I've only got limited time to \"get git\" :-)\n\nIts exactly what I need for versioning off my project where the file \n\"portfolio\" (i.e. the configuration of the containers) changes every version \n(probably the containers change more than content - I know, badly written, \nbut hey, that's all in the past)\n\nOn another note - your name is very resonant of this part of the world \n(Northern Ireland) - I'm guessing you're from here or have some roots here ?\n\n\"Jeff Whiteside\" wrote in message \nnews:3ab397d0812292132h6ffe7e49o650fbf35588666db@mail.gmail.com...\n> you should reply to the original thread, so that you don't create a\n> new one. makes it almost impossible to find what you're referencing.\n>\n> also, don't bother with git-rm. a simple rm is the same thing.\n> (committing will notice that this file is gone)\n>\n> On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 8:29 PM, Zorba wrote:\n>> (punches air with fist)\n>> yes indeed !\n>>\n>> sorry, I didn't follow up on the --update flag first time\n>>\n>> $ git add -A .\n>> $ git commit\n>>\n>> home in a boat!\n>>\n>> \"Jacob Helwig\" wrote in message\n>> news:8c9a060812292017m600ca246pf8660630d49a7067@mail.gmail.com...\n>>> On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 20:11, Conor Rafferty\n>>> wrote:\n>>>> Ah, but what about the files that have been removed from this version ?\n>>>> - that's the whole point of doing commit -a, so I don't have to spend\n>>>> ages doing diffs to produce a list of files to feed into git-rm\n>>>>\n>>>> Or have I missed another glarer ?\n>>>>\n>>>> -----Original Message-----\n>>>> From: Jacob Helwig [mailto:jacob.helwig@gmail.com]\n>>>> Sent: 30 December 2008 04:01\n>>>> To: git@vger.kernel.org\n>>>> Cc: Conor Rafferty\n>>>> Subject: Re: is there an easier way to do this ? [Scanned]\n>>>>\n>>>> On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 19:51, Zorba wrote:\n>>>>> The manual shows you can SHOW untracked files, but not add them as\n>>>>> part of the commit -a jig\n>>>>>\n>>>>> Seems a bit strange that git-add operates on both exisging and new\n>>>>> files when used standalone, but its behaviour changes when\n>>>>> encapsulated in commit -a...\n>>>>>\n>>>>> So, I thought maybe $ git commit -a, then $ git add .\n>>>>> but then the files tracked have missed the commit boat they were meant\n>>>>\n>>>>> to be on, haven't they,\n>>>>>\n>>>>> hang on -\n>>>>> what about\n>>>>>\n>>>>> $ git add .\n>>>>> $ git commit -a\n>>>>>\n>>>>> I do believe I've cracked it\n>>>>> if so, it seems a bit wasteful, 2x adds (one explicti and one embedded\n>>>>\n>>>>> in -a) ? shame on you linux kernel guys, i'd have expected better :-)\n>>>>>\n>>>>> \"Zorba\" wrote in message\n>>>>> news:gjc52u$ehc$4@ger.gmane.org...\n>>>>>> ok, now I'm in this for real, archiving versions of our website\n>>>>>> project (5k files approx)\n>>>>>>\n>>>>>> so here is the workflow:\n>>>>>>\n>>>>>> - copy version 1 files into GIT dir\n>>>>>>\n>>>>>> - open git bash\n>>>>>>\n>>>>>> $ git init\n>>>>>>\n>>>>>> $ git add .\n>>>>>>\n>>>>>> $ git commit -m \"version1\"\n>>>>>>\n>>>>>> all vanilla ? cool\n>>>>>> next job = store version 2, so delete version 1 files from GIT dir,\n>>>>>> copy in version 2\n>>>>>> version2 has different files from 1 - which ones? Out of 5k files\n>>>>>> could be 1% = 50 new ones, and same amount removed. Why should I\n>>>>>> care, with such a powerful friend as git around, n'est pas?\n>>>>>> THIS TIME we are going to be CLEVER and use \"-a\" flag on commit to\n>>>>>> pick up any files that have been REMOVED (or \"deleted\" in git-speak)\n>>>>>>\n>>>>>> $ git commit -a -m \"version2\"\n>>>>>>\n>>>>>> BUT this does not pick up any new ones that have been added,\n>>>>>>\n>>>>>> and when we run\n>>>>>>\n>>>>>> $ git status > ../git_status.txt\n>>>>>>\n>>>>>> these are referred to as \"untracked files\"\n>>>>>> only problem there are 50 ish\n>>>>>> is there not another flag on git commit to treat any untracked file\n>>>>>> as a new file ?\n>>>>>> (would save me typing or creating a list out of these untracked ones\n>>>>>> and feeding them into git add)\n>>>>>>\n>>>>>> I know, I realise now I should have looked up git-commit in the\n>>>>>> manual - in case its not there, pls enlighten me !\n>>>>>>\n>>>>>>\n>>>>>>\n>>>>>\n>>>>>\n>>>>>\n>>>>> --\n>>>>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line \"unsubscribe git\" in the\n>>>>> body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at\n>>>>> http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html\n>>>>>\n>>>>\n>>>> If you do an explicit git add, then you don't need the -a on git \n>>>> commit,\n>>>> since everything you want to commit will already be in the index for \n>>>> git\n>>>> commit to work with.\n>>>>\n>>>\n>>> See the -A flag for git add (and it's reference to --update). -A will\n>>> remove files that have been removed, add untracked, and update ones\n>>> that have changed, all in one go.\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>> --\n>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line \"unsubscribe git\" in\n>> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org\n>> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html\n>> \n"}]}