Re: [PATCH] diff: stop output garbled message in dry run mode
- From
Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
- Date
- Oct 18, 2025, 09:56 UTC
- Message-ID
- <20251018095650.GG1060824@coredump.intra.peff.net>
- In-Reply-To
- <FE99A260-ECD9-4B39-9E31-B4E842DC7D04@gmail.com>
On Sat, Oct 18, 2025 at 05:50:56PM +0800, Lidong Yan wrote:
Show 20 quoted lines
> Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes: > > > > On Sat, Oct 18, 2025 at 09:11:34AM +0800, Lidong Yan wrote: > > > >>> Test that exercises "git diff -I<regex>" is in line with what the > >>> original b55e6d36eb wanted to address, but given that we saw a > >>> recent regression report like [*], I would have liked to see "git > >>> diff --quiet" in the test as well. > >> > >> I will read Peff’s test and see if I should also add some similar tests > > > > What I was hoping was that we'd apply my patch, as a matter of release > > engineering (backing out the regression-causing bit of b55e6d36eb). And > > then you could make more-specific fixes on top (since -I would still > > have potential problems). And then you don't need to add a test for the > > regression case, since it's already there. > > > > -Peff > > Sorry I sent my patch before I noticed this message.
No worries. I just saw it, and it looks reasonable to me. So while what I wrote above was my preferred outcome, I am OK with doing it all as one patch, too.
-Peff