Re: git status: small difference between stating whole repository and small subdirectory

From

Thomas Rast <trast@inf.ethz.ch>

Date

Feb 20, 2012, 18:45 UTC

Message-ID

<87d3991gyg.fsf@thomas.inf.ethz.ch>

In-Reply-To

<20120220151134.GA13135@sigill.intra.peff.net>

Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:

> diff --git a/unpack-trees.c b/unpack-trees.c
> index 8be3f6c..e8aedea 100644
> --- a/unpack-trees.c
> +++ b/unpack-trees.c
> @@ -1135,6 +1135,7 @@ int unpack_trees(unsigned len, struct tree_desc *t, struct unpack_trees_options
>  		}
>  	}
>  
> +	o->result.cache_tree = o->src_index->cache_tree;
>  	o->src_index = NULL;
>  	ret = check_updates(o) ? (-2) : 0;
>  	if (o->dst_index)

> It makes "git checkout" with no changes just work (since we preserve the
> cache tree, and it doesn't need updated). It makes something like "git
> checkout HEAD^" work, keeping most of the cache-tree intact, but
> invalidating trees containing paths that were modified.

diff --git i/t/t0090-cache-tree.sh w/t/t0090-cache-tree.sh
index 6c33e28..5706305 100755
--- i/t/t0090-cache-tree.sh
+++ w/t/t0090-cache-tree.sh
@@ -16,14 +16,16 @@ cmp_cache_tree () {
 # We don't bother with actually checking the SHA1:
 # test-dump-cache-tree already verifies that all existing data is
 # correct.
-test_shallow_cache_tree () {
-	printf "SHA  (%d entries, 0 subtrees)\n" $(git ls-files|wc -l) >expect &&
+test_cache_tree () {
+	printf "SHA  (%d entries, 1 subtrees)\n" $(git ls-files|wc -l) >expect &&
+	printf "SHA sub/ (%d entries, 0 subtrees)\n" $(git ls-files sub|wc -l) >>expect &&
 	cmp_cache_tree expect
 }
 
 test_invalid_cache_tree () {
-	echo "invalid                                   (0 subtrees)" >expect &&
-	printf "SHA #(ref)  (%d entries, 0 subtrees)\n" $(git ls-files|wc -l) >>expect &&
+	echo "invalid                                   (1 subtrees)" >expect &&
+	printf "SHA #(ref)  (%d entries, 1 subtrees)\n" $(git ls-files|wc -l) >>expect &&
+	printf "SHA sub/ (%d entries, 0 subtrees)\n" $(git ls-files sub|wc -l) >>expect &&
 	cmp_cache_tree expect
 }
 
@@ -33,13 +35,16 @@ test_no_cache_tree () {
 }
 
 test_expect_failure 'initial commit has cache-tree' '
+	mkdir sub &&
+	echo bar > sub/bar &&
+	git add sub/bar &&
 	test_commit foo &&
-	test_shallow_cache_tree
+	test_cache_tree
 '
 
 test_expect_success 'read-tree HEAD establishes cache-tree' '
 	git read-tree HEAD &&
-	test_shallow_cache_tree
+	test_cache_tree
 '
 
 test_expect_success 'git-add invalidates cache-tree' '
@@ -59,7 +64,7 @@ test_expect_success 'update-index invalidates cache-tree' '
 test_expect_success 'write-tree establishes cache-tree' '
 	test-scrap-cache-tree &&
 	git write-tree &&
-	test_shallow_cache_tree
+	test_cache_tree
 '
 
 test_expect_success 'test-scrap-cache-tree works' '
@@ -70,24 +75,39 @@ test_expect_success 'test-scrap-cache-tree works' '
 
 test_expect_success 'second commit has cache-tree' '
 	test_commit bar &&
-	test_shallow_cache_tree
+	test_cache_tree
 '
 
 test_expect_success 'reset --hard gives cache-tree' '
 	test-scrap-cache-tree &&
 	git reset --hard &&
-	test_shallow_cache_tree
+	test_cache_tree
 '
 
 test_expect_success 'reset --hard without index gives cache-tree' '
 	rm -f .git/index &&
 	git reset --hard &&
-	test_shallow_cache_tree
+	test_cache_tree
 '
 
-test_expect_failure 'checkout gives cache-tree' '
+test_expect_success 'checkout HEAD leaves cache-tree intact' '
+	git read-tree HEAD &&
+	git checkout HEAD &&
+	test_cache_tree
+'
+
+# NEEDSWORK: only one of these two can succeed.  The second is there
+# because it would be the better result.
+test_expect_success 'checkout HEAD^ correctly invalidates cache-tree' '
+	git checkout HEAD^ &&
+	test_invalid_cache_tree
+'
+
+test_expect_failure 'checkout HEAD^ gives full cache-tree' '
+	git checkout master &&
+	git read-tree HEAD &&
 	git checkout HEAD^ &&
-	test_shallow_cache_tree
+	test_cache_tree
 '
 
 test_done

-- 
Thomas Rast
trast@{inf,student}.ethz.ch