git/list[1] front-page[2] threads[3] people[4] search[5] about
 

Re: Delete gitlink entry but keep .gitmodules file unmodified

From
SVSemen Vadishev <semen.vadishev@tmatesoft.com>
Date
Apr 18, 2012, 14:34 UTC
Message-ID
<4F8ED0F6.5070106@tmatesoft.com>
In-Reply-To
<4F8EC4E2.6070507@web.de>
Show 8 quoted lines
> Yes, unfortunately current git isn't able to do that (even though work
> is ongoing to make future versions handle that just fine). Right now
> the populated submodule "ext" won't be removed when you switch to a
> branch where it doesn't exist. If the new branch has a tree there,
> you'll almost certainly get an error when trying to switch to it as
> that would overwrite files left over from the submodule (end even if
> it doesn't, you'll might get lots of untracked files in the tree
> after the checkout).

We assume such modifications are rare enough, so this downside is fairly minor in our case.

And what about these obsolete [submodule "foo"] sections left in .gitmodules and .git/config files? Do they bring any problems? Maybe for some older git versions?

Thank you,

Semen Vadishev, TMate Software, http://subgit.com/ - git+svn on the server side!

On 4/18/12 17:42, Jens Lehmann wrote:
Show 45 quoted lines
> Am 18.04.2012 15:19, schrieb Semen Vadishev:
>> Suppose one has a properly initialized submodule in a tree like this:
>>
>> $ git ls-tree HEAD
>> 100644 blob d208248ba4ab1d1791dc27f451dcaedb87dc19e1    .gitmodules
>> 160000 commit ec633ea81e3cf64c3735ef4acd5ff9a490ed54eb    ext
>> 100644 blob 597d6924118c00054efd526d9e48f68198f7da12    file.txt
>>
>> $ git show HEAD:.gitmodules
>> [submodule "ext"]
>>          path = ext
>>          url = $URL
>>
>> Then one pulls a modification that replaces 'ext' gitlink by some blob or tree entry, but keeps '.gitmodules' the same:
>>
>> $ git ls-tree HEAD
>> 100644 blob d208248ba4ab1d1791dc27f451dcaedb87dc19e1    .gitmodules
>> 040000 tree 82e3a754b6a0fcb238b03c0e47d05219fbf9cf89    ext
>> 100644 blob 597d6924118c00054efd526d9e48f68198f7da12    file.txt
>>
>> Are there any possible downsides of such modification we should be aware of?
> Yes, unfortunately current git isn't able to do that (even though work
> is ongoing to make future versions handle that just fine). Right now
> the populated submodule "ext" won't be removed when you switch to a
> branch where it doesn't exist. If the new branch has a tree there,
> you'll almost certainly get an error when trying to switch to it as
> that would overwrite files left over from the submodule (end even if
> it doesn't, you'll might get lots of untracked files in the tree
> after the checkout).
>
> As a workaround you could use a symbolic link (assuming you FS supports
> that) and switch that around between two different directories:
>
> 100644 .gitmodules
> 100644 ext ->  ext_sub
> 160000 ext_sub
>
> 100644 .gitmodules
> 100644 ext ->  ext_tree
> 160000 ext_tree
>
> If you then add ext_sub and ext_tree to the .gitignore of each side it
> isn't present in, everything should work just fine (and when git learns
> to handle that case, you can get rid of that workaround for future
> commits).
Previous: Jens LehmannNext: Jens Lehmann
Message 3 of 4 in “Delete gitlink entry but keep .gitmodules file unmodified”
  1. Semen VadishevApr 18, 2012
  2. Jens LehmannApr 18, 2012
  3. Semen VadishevApr 18, 2012
  4. Jens LehmannApr 19, 2012

Read the whole thread, see it on lore, or plain text.

$ cat FOOTERMessages come from the public archive at lore.kernel.org/git, fetched every hour. The front page is chosen and written each morning by an AI editor and can be wrong; the threads themselves are the record. About and API. For agents: an MCP server at https://gitlist.dev/mcp, and any thread, story or person page as Markdown by adding .md to its URL (or sending Accept: text/markdown). Details in /llms.txt.