From: Jeremy Ramer <jdramer@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 09 Oct 2008 22:13:07 GMT
Subject: Re: ls-files [Was: Re: Fwd: git status options feature suggestion]
Message-ID: <b9fd99020810091513j21d37e0y94a387cd6d72bd2@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20081009214118.GZ8203@spearce.org>

On Thu, Oct 9, 2008 at 3:41 PM, Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org> wrote:
> James Cloos <cloos@jhcloos.com> wrote:
>> >>>>> "Johannes" == Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> writes:
>>
>> >> > How about "git ls-files -o"?
>> >>
>> >> doh... hadn't even heard of that command.
>>
>> Johannes> Which is good!  As ls-files is listed as plumbing.
>> Johannes> Users should not need to call ls-files,
>>
>> That is a bug, then.  ls-files is one of the more important user-level
>> commands in git.
>>
>> It is vastly more efficient than find(1) or a --recursive call to
>> grep(1).
>
> How about using "git grep" then?  No need for ls-files...

I use git-grep for searching the contents of files in the repo, but it
seems to me that git ls-files is necessary for quickly parsing the
file names themselves.

>
> --
> Shawn.
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>