Re: [PATCH 03/23] Introduce "skip-worktree" bit in index, teach Git to get/set this bit

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

 



On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 2:20 PM, Johannes Sixt <j.sixt@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy schrieb:
>> 2009/12/15 Greg Price <price@xxxxxxxxxxx>:
>>> I confess I can't tell how the skip-worktree bit does differ from
>>> assume-unchanged.  Is its 'goal' different only in that you have a
>>> different motivation for introducing it, or does it actually have a
>>> different effect -- and what is that different effect?
>>
>> On the fun side, you could use both bits in the same worktree, to
>> narrow your worktree and have some assume-unchanged files.
>>
>> Another difference is that with assume-unchanged bit, you make a
>> promise to Git that those assume-unchanged files are "good", Git does
>> not have to care for them. If somehow you violate the promise, Git can
>> harm your files on worktree.
>
> So, the difference is that skip-worktree will not overwrite a file that is
> different from the version in the index, but assume-unchanged can? Right?

Yes.
-- 
Duy
--
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]