From: Junio C Hamano Date: Wed, 25 May 2011 21:36:01 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] unpack-trees: add the dry_run flag to unpack_trees_options Message-ID: <7vr57m1n0e.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> In-Reply-To: <4DDD6197.7060209@web.de> Jens Lehmann writes: > Until now there was no way to test if unpack_trees() with update=1 would > succeed without really updating the work tree. The reason for that is that > setting update to 0 does skip the tests for new files and deactivates the > sparse handling, thereby making that unsuitable as a dry run. > > Add the new dry_run flag to struct unpack_trees_options unpack_trees(). > Setting that together with the update flag will check if the work tree > update would be successful without doing it for real. > > The only class of problems that is not detected at the moment are file > system conditions like ENOSPC or missing permissions. Also the index > entries of updated files are not as they would be after a real checkout > because lstat() isn't run as the files aren't updated for real. > > Signed-off-by: Jens Lehmann > --- Looks good. remove_marked_cache_entries() does not touch the working tree, and because you are not calling unlink_entry(), you won't trigger schedule_dir_for_removal() hence remove_scheduled_dirs() won't cause us any trouble either. Will queue. Thanks.