Re: ls-files --exclude broken?

From: Jay Soffian <jaysoffian@gmail.com>
Date: Sep 15, 2010, 23:19 UTC
Message-ID: <AANLkTimYNtU7sHn4_Vx50evTWDpMK_=XgshU3ZzT+eVw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <7v62y661pl.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>

On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 7:12 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:

Show 7 quoted lines

>> Am I missing something really obvious here?
>>
>> kore:~/Repos/git (master)$ git ls-files | wc -l
>>     2009
>
> You asked it to show the cached paths (default).  Your project currently
> tracks 2009 paths in the index.

Correct.

Show 6 quoted lines

>> kore:~/Repos/git (master)$ git ls-files -x \* | wc -l
>>     2009
>
> You told that '*' is the exclude pattern for carrying out some operation,
> but you didn't tell what operation you want.  You are shown the cached
> paths (default).

I want cached paths, minus the exclude pattern. Using -c -x \* gives the same result.

There is no indication in the man page that -x doesn't apply to -c.

Show 10 quoted lines

>> kore:~/Repos/git (master)$ git ls-files -i -x \* | wc -l
>>     2009
>
> You told that '*' is the exclude pattern, you want only paths that match
> the exclude pattern, and chose to show files in the index (which again is
> the default) by not saying -o.
>
> I've never found -i useful myself (actually I don't find many options the
> command has very useful anymore), but the above is how I read the ls-files
> manual page.

I don't care about -i myself, and maybe I should have been clearer. AFAICT, [-c] -x is broken:

$ git ls-files -c -x \* |wc -l
    2009

       -c, --cached
           Show cached files in the output (default)

       -x <pattern>, --exclude=<pattern>
           Skips files matching pattern. Note that pattern is a shell
wildcard pattern.

Oh, geez, here it is lower down in the man page:

  git ls-files can use a list of "exclude patterns" when traversing
the directory tree and finding files to show when the flags --others
or --ignored are specified. gitignore(5) specifies the format of
exclude patterns.

Bah, what use is that? Minimally ls-files shouldn't accept -x unless given either --ignored or --others if that's all it applies to. I guess this is my itch to scratch.

j.