From: SZEDER Gábor Date: Sat, 21 Mar 2015 08:46:12 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] git prompt: Use toplevel to find untracked files. Message-ID: <20150321094612.Horde.fk34YSFwRX2Ew3gKIdyzPw5@webmail.informatik.kit.edu> In-Reply-To: Quoting Cody Taylor : > SZEDER Gábor writes: >> Somehow I had a hard time making sense out of "when the current working >> directory was not a parent of the untracked file". Perhaps "when the >> untracked files are outside of the current working directory" would be >> easier to grok? > > That description doesn't cover all cases. I'm not sure I understand. I think we both say the same, though from different views: you describe what cwd is not relative to the untracked file in the problematic case, while I describe where the untracked file is relative to cwd in the same case. > Scenario #1: Let's say there is an untracked file at `$ROOT/file`. > When your CWD is `$ROOT/`, all is well. If you cd to `$ROOT/src/` the > ls-files command failed to find the untracked file. After cd to '$ROOT/src' the untracked file '$ROOT/file' is outside cwd, which matches my description and is what your patch covers. > Scenario #2: Let's say there is an untracked file at `$ROOT/src/file`. > The ls-files command would find the file if the CWD is `$ROOT/` or > `$ROOT/src/`, but not if the CWD is `$ROOT/bin/` or > `$ROOT/src/folder/`. Again, after cd to '$ROOT/bin' the untracked file '$ROOT/src/file' is outside cwd, so my description and your patch cover it. > Your description may be easier to understand, but I don't agree it's > accurate. Well, I think it's accurate, but now I doubt that it's easier to understand :) Gábor