Re: 'read-tree -m head' vs 'read-tree head'

From: Petr Baudis <pasky@ucw.cz>
Date: May 3, 2005, 21:34 UTC
Message-ID: <20050503213444.GD15995@pasky.ji.cz>
In-Reply-To: <7vbr7sw2aj.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>

Dear diary, on Tue, May 03, 2005 at 09:13:40PM CEST, I got a letter where Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net> told me that...

Show 11 quoted lines

> That said, I've been wondering if "git-read-tree -m <tree>"
> always does the same thing (but only making the operation
> afterwards faster) as "git-read-tree <tree>".  That is, if there
> is a valid use case where you would want to use it without "-m"
> because "-m" does something wrong.  If there is no such valid
> use case probably we should always do "-m" version if we are
> reading only one tree, practically deprecating "-m" flag to the
> same status as "-r" flag to git-diff-cache.
> 
> However, I have not had time to think things through and have
> not bugged Linus about it myself.

-m fails when your cache file is missing/corrupted. Not that it cannot be fixed, just remember to fix it if you are going to do what you described.

-- 
				Petr "Pasky" Baudis
Stuff: http://pasky.or.cz/
C++: an octopus made by nailing extra legs onto a dog. -- Steve Taylor