Re: Best way to check for a "dirty" working tree?
Hi Dirk,
Dirk Süsserott wrote:
Show 10 quoted lines
> I have a script which moves data from somewhere to my local repo and
> then checks it in, like so:
>
> -----------
> mv /tmp/foo.bar .
> git commit -am "Updated foo.bar at $timestamp"
> -----------
>
> However, before overwriting "foo.bar" in my working directory, I'd like
> to check whether my working tree is dirty (at least "foo.bar").
Interesting example. Sensible, as long as you limit the commit to foo.bar (i.e., "git commit -m ... --only foo.bar")!
Show 5 quoted lines
> I tried
>
> A) if ! git diff-index --quiet HEAD -- foo.bar; then
> dirty=1
> fi
To piggy-back on what Ram wrote, this is a question about the difference between porcelain (high-level) and plumbing (low-level) commands.
Generally speaking, plumbing is meant to give more stable behavior for scripts, in two ways:
- On one hand we make a concerted effort to keep the command-line
usage and output of plumbing stable. By contrast, porcelain will
change over time as we learn about the way people work.
- On the other hand plumbing is designed to produce simple, reliable,
and machine-friendly behavior. For example, while "git checkout"
will guess what the caller is trying to do based on whether its
first argument is a branch name or a file, "git checkout-index"
only accepts pathspecs. Plumbing tends to produce parseable
output and not to automatically spawn a pager when its output is
going to the terminal or to change behavior based on configuration.
Now, a word of warning. One aspect of this "do not second-guess the caller" behavior is that low-level commands like "git diff-index" blindly trust stat() information in the index, rather than going to re-read a seemingly modified file and updating the index if the content is not changed. You can see this by running "touch foo.bar"; "git diff-index" will report the file as changed, until you use "git update-index" to refresh the stat information:
git update-index --refresh --unmerged -q >/dev/null || :
if ! git diff-index --quiet HEAD -- foo.bar; then
dirty=1
fi
Alas, this doesn't seem to be documented anywhere (except for the gitcore-tutorial(7))! It ought to be.
> Both A) and B) work. But which one is better/faster/more reliable?
I suspect the fastest (by virtue of saving a fork + exec and not having to stat files twice, once for update-index and again for diff-index) is
git -c diff.autorefreshindex=true diff --quiet -- foo.bar
by a sad accident of history --- the "opportunistic index refresh" behavior it implements does not seem to be exposed as plumbing. If you are going to be performing such operations in a loop, then
git update-index --refresh --unmerged -q >/dev/null || :
for i in loop
do
... actions like diff-index that trust the index ...
done
will be faster. And the latter is plumbing, with all the niceties that entails, so if I were in your shoes I'd use the latter.
Hope that helps, Jonathan