Re: [GIT PULL] Please pull mergetool.git

From: Theodore Tso <tytso@mit.edu>
Date: Mar 14, 2007, 06:17 UTC
Message-ID: <20070314061744.GA12710@thunk.org>
In-Reply-To: <20070314055923.GA20978@spearce.org>

On Wed, Mar 14, 2007 at 01:59:23AM -0400, Shawn O. Pearce wrote:

Show 17 quoted lines

> Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu> wrote:
> > +    base_mode=`git ls-files -u -- "$path" | awk '{if ($3==1) print $1;}'`
> > +    local_mode=`git ls-files -u -- "$path" | awk '{if ($3==2) print $1;}'`
> > +    remote_mode=`git ls-files -u -- "$path" | awk '{if ($3==3) print $1;}'`
> > +
> > +    base_present   && git cat-file blob ":1:$path" > "$BASE" 2>/dev/null
> > +    local_present  && git cat-file blob ":2:$path" > "$LOCAL" 2>/dev/null
> > +    remote_present && git cat-file blob ":3:$path" > "$REMOTE" 2>/dev/null
> 
> Why not use `git checkout-index --stage=all "$path"` ?
> E.g.:
> 
> 	git checkout-index --stage=all "$path" |
> 	read base_temp local_temp remote_temp path
> 
> I'm not trying to nitpick, I'm just curious about why this particular
> feature of checkout-index was not useful here.

1)  I didn't know about it.

2) If I used it would I have to have renamed the files to
<path>.LOCAL, <path>.BASE, et.al, because with most of the graphical
merge tools, the filename is the only thing which gets displayed to
tell the user which file came from the local branch or the remote
branch or the base revision --- since file names such as
.merge_file_QBaxrn and .merge_file_prSEqs don't have a lot of human
meaning.....

So I don't know that it would havce saved much in the script. You replace three invocations to git-cat-file with one invocation to git-checkout-index plus three invocations to mv.

Regards,

						- Ted