Carl Worth wrote:
> As has been discussed recently, update-index isn't intended as a
> "porcelain" command so the mention of it in the output of git-commit
> does lead to some user confusion.
> ---
> wt-status.c | 2 +-
> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/wt-status.c b/wt-status.c
> index 7dd6857..4edabcd 100644
> --- a/wt-status.c
> +++ b/wt-status.c
> @@ -126,7 +126,7 @@ static void wt_status_print_changed_cb(s
> int i;
> if (q->nr)
> wt_status_print_header("Changed but not updated",
> - "use git-update-index to mark for commit");
> + "use \"git commit <files>\" to commit or \"git commit -a\" for all");
> for (i = 0; i < q->nr; i++)
> wt_status_print_filepair(WT_STATUS_CHANGED, q->queue[i]);
> if (q->nr)
> --
> 1.4.3.3.gf040
Are we sure this isn't porcelain-ish? We need to use it in merge
conflict correction and the like? You can't use git-commit there as a
replacement. I'd expect it to be 'git update-index' rather than
'git-update-index' of course.
-apw
-
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