Matthieu Moy <Matthieu.Moy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> Ramkumar Ramachandra <artagnon@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
>> was checking it out: a 'git log <pathspec>', when referring to a file
>> inside the subtree, doesn't work as expected: it only displays the
>> HEAD commit.
>
> This is somehow expected: the subtree merge changed the filename during
> merge (it is subtree/file.txt after the merge, and just file.txt
> before), so "git log" without --follow just considers the file appeared.
>
> OTOH, I think this is a known limitation of "git log --follow" that it
> does not follow renames done by subtree merges.
Umm, it should follow the rename. The big limitation is that it is
unable to follow more than one name at a time, so if the file exists on
both sides of the subtree merge, it will follow the original name. And
that's the common case; only the very first merge of the subtree has the
files only on one side.
You can see this by comparing
git log --oneline --follow gitk-git/gitk
with
git log --oneline -- gitk gitk-git/gitk
--
Thomas Rast
trast@{inf,student}.ethz.ch
--
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