Re: What should "git submodule summary" give before an initial commit?
- From
Jens Lehmann <jens.lehmann@web.de>
- Date
- Mar 4, 2010, 00:36 UTC
- Message-ID
- <4B8F00AA.5050007@web.de>
- In-Reply-To
- <7vhboxf4nx.fsf_-_@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
Am 03.03.2010 22:58, schrieb Junio C Hamano:
Show 43 quoted lines
> "git status" collects the changes for both the index (since HEAD) and the
> working tree files (since the index), summarizes and shows them. When it
> is run before the first commit is made, it uses a logic different from the
> one used in the normal case to gather the information on the index, as we
> don't have HEAD yet, i.e. instead of "diff-index HEAD", we would run
> "diff-index emtpy-tree".
>
> How should status.submodulesummary integrate into this framework?
>
> Currently, it blindly runs "git submodule summary", and it gives an extra
> error message about HEAD not being a commit, and people (me included)
> misguidedly have spent time on squelching the message.
>
> But I think that was _all wrong_. I do not think "git submodule summary"
> should fail even when you haven't made your first commit.
>
> If you are before the first commit, we say everything you have in the
> index is a change you are adding with your next commit (which will be your
> initial one). If you added a submodule commit to the index, shouldn't
> "git submodule summary" say "you'll be committing the addition of this
> subproject"? IOW, shouldn't we be comparing an empty tree to find added
> submodules, like this, when we haven't made the first commit?
>
> git-submodule.sh | 4 ++--
> 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/git-submodule.sh b/git-submodule.sh
> index 5869c00..0397f9d 100755
> --- a/git-submodule.sh
> +++ b/git-submodule.sh
> @@ -556,10 +556,10 @@ cmd_summary() {
> if rev=$(git rev-parse -q --verify --default HEAD ${1+"$1"})
> then
> head=$rev
> - shift
> + test $# = 0 || shift
> elif test -z "$1" -o "$1" = "HEAD"
> then
> - return
> + head=4b825dc642cb6eb9a060e54bf8d69288fbee4904
> else
> head="HEAD"
> fiAcked-by: Jens Lehmann <Jens.Lehmann@web.de>
Your patch fixes "git submodule summary" in a freshly created repo for me.
But to make "git status" with status.submodulesummary work as expected, i need something like the following patch on top of current pu (because "git submodule summary --cached HEAD" returns no changes in a freshly created repo):
diff --git a/wt-status.c b/wt-status.c index 5807fc3..6769c2e 100644 --- a/wt-status.c +++ b/wt-status.c @@ -459,11 +459,21 @@ static void wt_status_print_changed(struct wt_status *s) wt_status_print_trailer(s); } -static void wt_status_print_submodule_summary(struct wt_status *s, int uncommitted) +static void wt_status_print_submodule_summary(struct wt_status *s, int uncommitted, int initial) { struct child_process sm_summary; char summary_limit[64]; char index[PATH_MAX]; + const char *ref = NULL; + if (!uncommitted) { + if (s->amend) + ref = "HEAD^"; + else + if (initial) + ref = "4b825dc642cb6eb9a060e54bf8d69288fbee4904"; + else + ref = "HEAD"; + } const char *env[] = { index, NULL }; const char *argv[] = { "submodule", @@ -472,7 +482,7 @@ static void wt_status_print_submodule_summary(struct wt_status *s, int uncommitt "--for-status", "--summary-limit", summary_limit, - uncommitted ? NULL : (s->amend ? "HEAD^" : "HEAD"), + ref, NULL }; @@ -581,8 +591,8 @@ void wt_status_print(struct wt_status *s) wt_status_print_unmerged(s); wt_status_print_changed(s); if (s->submodule_summary) { - wt_status_print_submodule_summary(s, 0); /* staged */ - wt_status_print_submodule_summary(s, 1); /* unstaged */ + wt_status_print_submodule_summary(s, 0, s->is_initial); /* staged */ + wt_status_print_submodule_summary(s, 1, 0); /* unstaged */ } if (s->show_untracked_files) wt_status_print_untracked(s);