Re: [RFC PATCH v3 8/8] --sparse for porcelains

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Jakub Narebski <jnareb@xxxxxxxxx> writes:

>>> Hmmm... this looks like either argument for introducing --full option
>>>  to git-checkout (ignore CE_VALID bit, checkout everything, and clean
>>>  CE_VALID (?))...
>>>
>>>  ...or for going with _separate_ bit for partial checkout, like in the
>>>  very first version of this series, which otherwise functions like
>>>  CE_VALID, or is just used to mark that CE_VALID was set using sparse.

How would a separate bit help?  Just like you need to clear CE_VALID bit
to revert the index into a normal (or "non sparse") state somehow, you
would need to have a way to clear that separate bit anyway.

A separate bit would help only if you want to handle assume-unchanged and
sparse checkout independently. But my impression was that the recent lstat
reduction effort addressed the issue assume-unchanged were invented to
work around in the first place.

Cf. http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/123218/focus=123252

There is no reason to use assume-unchanged to tell git not to lstat to see
if a path is up-to-date by promising that you are not going to touch it
after you checked it out.

So I do not understand why you would want a separate bit, nor why you
think a separate bit would help when changing the index state from sparse
to non-sparse (or vice versa).
--
To unsubscribe from this list: 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

[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]