From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2008 16:43:56 GMT
Subject: Re: [RFH] CE_REMOVE conversion
Message-ID: <7vodaauunn.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.1.00.0802210746410.7833@woody.linux-foundation.org>

Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> writes:

> On Thu, 21 Feb 2008, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> 
>> but I am wondering if we should instead really _remove_ entries
>> from the index instead, just like the attached patch.
> ...
> So your patch looks very good to me. Basically, the merge code absolutely 
> does not want to be called with some entries already marked as CE_REMOVE 
> (it's supposed to *add* those markers as part of resolving the merge, but 
> it is not able to handle them in the source).
>
> So ack, ack, ack.

And we probably should unhash the entry instead of just removing
it?  Come to think of it, I am starting to wonder if the
entries unpack-trees add to and drop from the index are hashed
and unhashed correctly...