threads / patch / 13439

patchdoc: clarify definition of "update" for git-add -u

Subject: [PATCH] doc: clarify definition of "update" for git-add -u

## tl;dr

3 messages between May 8, 2008 and May 11, 2008. Diffs are folded; open one to read it.

replies: 2people: 2as markdown or json

Jeff King· May 8, 2008, 17:25 UTC · lore

The "-u" option is described only in terms of "updating" files, which in turn is described only as "similar to what git commit -a does". Let's be a little more specific about what updating entails.

Suggested by Geoffrey Irving.
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
---
The wrapping is funny to make the text diff easier to read. Junio, do
you prefer it that way, or in the canonical form?
 Documentation/git-add.txt |    4 +++-
 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
Show changes to Documentation/git-add.txt +3 −1
diff --git a/Documentation/git-add.txt b/Documentation/git-add.txt
index 35e67a0..e2389e3 100644
--- a/Documentation/git-add.txt
+++ b/Documentation/git-add.txt
@@ -71,7 +71,9 @@ OPTIONS
 	the specified filepatterns before exiting.
 
 -u::
-	Update only files that git already knows about. This is similar
+	Update only files that git already knows about, staging modified
+	content for commit and marking deleted files for removal. This
+	is similar
 	to what "git commit -a" does in preparation for making a commit,
 	except that the update is limited to paths specified on the
 	command line. If no paths are specified, all tracked files in the
-- 
1.5.5.1.274.g7b68b
Junio C Hamano· May 11, 2008, 02:36 UTC · re: Jeff King · lore

Re: [PATCH] doc: clarify definition of "update" for git-add -u

Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:
> The wrapping is funny to make the text diff easier to read. Junio, do
> you prefer it that way, or in the canonical form?
Thanks, will apply.
Jeff King· May 11, 2008, 08:07 UTC · re: Junio C Hamano · lore

Re: [PATCH] doc: clarify definition of "update" for git-add -u

On Sat, May 10, 2008 at 07:36:16PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> > The wrapping is funny to make the text diff easier to read. Junio, do
> > you prefer it that way, or in the canonical form?
> 
> Thanks, will apply.
Thanks. But you still didn't answer my question. ;P
-Peff

← back to recent threads