>> If a "git checkout" would (optionally) make sure that all EOLs are >> properly set according to .gitattributes, the problem would be resolved. >> As this might be not so easy to implement, my suggestion was to make >> "git reset --hard" work more unobtrusive. I think we can provide a >> corresponding patch, if it has chances to get accepted. > > There have been other cases where git update-index --really-refresh > wasn't enough. You might want to check whether that is a suitable "patch > attack vector". This might be useful not only for you but also for others. So your suggestion is to fix "git update-index --really-refresh", so it's a replacement for "rm .git/index"? This sounds reasonable, especially as "rm .git/index" is something one feels not comfortable about when performing the first time ;-) Anyway, I'm still wondering if it will resolve the "git reset --hard" problem of re-checking out every file, even if content is already identical in the working tree. I think that part has to be fixed, too. What do you think about "git checkout --fix-eols" option as an alternative? Its uses cases are more limited, though. -- Best regards, Marc Strapetz ============= syntevo GmbH http://www.syntevo.com http://blog.syntevo.com On 13.01.2011 15:37, Michael J Gruber wrote: > Marc Strapetz venit, vidit, dixit 13.01.2011 15:28: >>>> case of missing .git/index, Git freshly writes all working tree files, >>>> ignoring already existing files which already have the correct content. >>>> Maybe this behavior is by intention and makes sense in some cases. In my >>>> case it has adverse effects on IDEs and probably other tools which are >>>> monitoring the file system. >>> >>> ...but changing gitattributes is something you don't do routinely in >>> your workflow; so, at worst there would be an occasional unnecessary run >>> of your build process. >> >> Our Git-SVN bridge does it, potentially on every pull. This is why we >> currently need to run "rm .git/index && git reset --hard" after every >> pull, resp. every checkout (switching to another commit may result in >> changed .gitattributes as well). > > OK, now you're telling us what this is about ;) > >> If a "git checkout" would (optionally) make sure that all EOLs are >> properly set according to .gitattributes, the problem would be resolved. >> As this might be not so easy to implement, my suggestion was to make >> "git reset --hard" work more unobtrusive. I think we can provide a >> corresponding patch, if it has chances to get accepted. > > There have been other cases where git update-index --really-refresh > wasn't enough. You might want to check whether that is a suitable "patch > attack vector". This might be useful not only for you but also for others. > > Michael > > -- 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