On Thu, Aug 10, 2006 at 02:36:49AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > In general, run_diff_X are _not_ designed to run twice. OK, makes sense. As you probably guessed, the reason is for the run-status in C. > If you are working in "next" branch where Johannes's merge-recur > work introduced discard_cache(), you could fake this somehow > stashing away a copy of the original index, and once you are > done with run_diff_index(), clean the slate by calling > discard_cache() once you are done, and swap the original index > in before running run_diff_files(). OK, doing a discard_cache() between the call to run_diff_index and run_diff_files seems to clear up the problem. But if I understand correctly, are you saying that run_diff_index has munged the index on disk, and I really need to be poking at a temporary copy? If so, why isn't that a problem when running (e.g.) "git-diff-index; git-ls-files"? > To solve this cleanly without doing the index munging hack, you > would (actually, I would) need to have a new path walker that > walks index, tree and working tree in parallel, which I was > working on in the git-status/git-commit rewrite I started and > discarded a few days ago. That does sound the cleanest, and it would enable a more useful status message, as you mentioned before. What caused you to stop working on it? Infeasible, or simply more infeasible than you would like right now? -Peff - : send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html