Re: [PATCH 4/4] git status: refresh the index

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

 



Jeff King, 2010-04-02 18:57:
> On Fri, Apr 02, 2010 at 02:27:21PM +0200, Markus Heidelberg wrote:
> 
> > +	fd = hold_locked_index(&index_lock, 1);
> > +	if (write_cache(fd, active_cache, active_nr) ||
> > +	    commit_locked_index(&index_lock))
> > +		die("unable to write new_index file");
> 
> Does this mean we will fail to run in a read-only repository?

You're right.
But that was already the case when "status" was "commit --dry-run".
I have to admit, I didn't think about this scenario, but simply looked
for the differences between these two commands.

> I think
> that status, like diff, should refresh the index on disk if it _can_,
> but as that refresh is a side effect of the main purpose (which is to
> output information), it should not be fatal if it cannot do so.

Sounds sensible.

Markus
--
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]