From: Markus Heidelberg <markus.heidelberg@web.de>
Date: Fri, 02 Apr 2010 20:37:03 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] git status: refresh the index
Message-ID: <201004022237.04130.markus.heidelberg@web.de>
In-Reply-To: <20100402165759.GB18576@coredump.intra.peff.net>

Jeff King, 2010-04-02 18:57:
> On Fri, Apr 02, 2010 at 02:27:21PM +0200, Markus Heidelberg wrote:
> 
> > +	fd = hold_locked_index(&index_lock, 1);
> > +	if (write_cache(fd, active_cache, active_nr) ||
> > +	    commit_locked_index(&index_lock))
> > +		die("unable to write new_index file");
> 
> Does this mean we will fail to run in a read-only repository?

You're right.
But that was already the case when "status" was "commit --dry-run".
I have to admit, I didn't think about this scenario, but simply looked
for the differences between these two commands.

> I think
> that status, like diff, should refresh the index on disk if it _can_,
> but as that refresh is a side effect of the main purpose (which is to
> output information), it should not be fatal if it cannot do so.

Sounds sensible.

Markus