Re: Restore a single file in the index back to HEAD

From: Andy Parkins <andyparkins@gmail.com>
Date: Nov 1, 2006, 23:09 UTC
Message-ID: <200611012309.42675.andyparkins@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <7vodrq251z.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>

On Wednesday 2006, November 01 22:08, Junio C Hamano wrote:

Show 5 quoted lines

> > x --- y --- z
>
> I assume when you do the following operation your .git/HEAD
> points at 'y' which is already committed, and 'z' does not exist
> yet (it does not come into the scenario you describe below).

Sorry, yes, it's there merely to get in the way.

> You forgot to mention at the same time it makes .git/HEAD point
> at 'x'.  That's the part I am not so sure about.

Hmmm, no I had imagined that in path mode HEAD would not be updated because that would change the whole commit instead of just the particular file.

> Ah (lightbulb goes on).  So after the above reset, you would do
> a "git commit" with or without -a to create a fixed-up 'y' that
> does not have changes to 'frotz'?

That's the one. It was described in another response as cherry-picking content instead of commits.

> Then it sort of makes sense.  --soft with paths specifier does
> not make much sense (paths specifier is a no-op in that case
> because --soft does not touch index nor working tree), but I

Agreed. --soft + path can't have any effect because it only updates HEAD, which has no meaning in reset-path mode.

> Ok, that workflow certainly makes sense.

When this thread gets looked back upon, is it going to be strange that you say "yes, making crazy changes makes sense"? :-)

> That's the "mechanical point of view only" description I was
> afraid of having.  While I think I now see why they can be

I must have a "mechanical point of view" brain. I can't see any further than the gear wheels.

Andy

-- 
Dr Andrew Parkins, M Eng (Hons), AMIEE