From: Philip Oakley <philipoakley@iee.org>
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2014 23:21:19 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH] commit: ignore assume-unchanged files in "commmit <file>" mode
Message-ID: <35EB570A2A994662AA2E89910ECE9668@PhilipOakley>
In-Reply-To: <1418093090.19104.1.camel@segulix>

From: "Sérgio Basto" <sergio@serjux.com> Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 
2014 2:44 AM
> On Sex, 2014-12-05 at 17:56 +0700, Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy wrote:
>> In the same spirit of 7fce6e3 (commit: correctly respect 
>> skip-worktree
>> bit - 2009-12-14), if a file is marked unchanged, skip it.
>>
>> Noticed-by: Sérgio Basto <sergio@serjux.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com>
>> ---
>>  builtin/commit.c                         |  2 +-
>>  t/t2106-update-index-assume-unchanged.sh | 10 ++++++++++
>>  2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/builtin/commit.c b/builtin/commit.c
>> index e108c53..ee3de12 100644
>> --- a/builtin/commit.c
>> +++ b/builtin/commit.c
>> @@ -252,7 +252,7 @@ static int list_paths(struct string_list *list, 
>> const char *with_tree,
>>  if (!ce_path_match(ce, pattern, m))
>>  continue;
>>  item = string_list_insert(list, ce->name);
>> - if (ce_skip_worktree(ce))
>> + if (ce->ce_flags & (CE_VALID | CE_SKIP_WORKTREE))
>>  item->util = item; /* better a valid pointer than a fake one */
>>  }
>>
>> diff --git a/t/t2106-update-index-assume-unchanged.sh 
>> b/t/t2106-update-index-assume-unchanged.sh
>> index 99d858c..dc332f5 100755
>> --- a/t/t2106-update-index-assume-unchanged.sh
>> +++ b/t/t2106-update-index-assume-unchanged.sh
>> @@ -21,4 +21,14 @@ test_expect_success 'do not switch branches with 
>> dirty file' \
>>  git update-index --assume-unchanged file &&
>>  test_must_fail git checkout master'
>>
>> +test_expect_success 'commit <paths> ignore assume-unchanged files' '
>> + : >anotherfile &&
>> + git add anotherfile &&
>> + echo dirty >anotherfile &&
>> + git commit -m one -- file anotherfile &&
>> + git diff --name-only HEAD^ HEAD >actual &&
>> + echo anotherfile >expected &&
>> + test_cmp expected actual
>> +'
>> +
>>  test_done
>
>
> works great many thanks,
>
Junio: Given that this patch avoids the user surprise that the `commit 
.` and `commit -a` produced unexpectedly different effects, should it 
also be included in the --assume unchanged patches? Or is the test 
inappropriate?

I'm guessing that there will still be other potential 'gotcha' code 
paths that would still produce surprise though.

Philip