Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 7:17 AM, Thomas Rast <trast@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>
>>> We are supposedly adding files, to to which cache if 'the_index' is
>>> discarded?
>> [...]
>>> if (!current_head) {
>>> discard_cache();
>>> + if (read_cache() < 0)
>>> + die(_("cannot read the index"));
>>> return;
>>> }
>>
>> It is not obvious to me that this is a correct change. discard_cache()
>> without subsequent reloading could also legitimately be used to empty
>> the index. So if you are fixing a bug, please justify the change and
>> provide a testcase to guard against it in the future.
>
> So istate->initialized is false, yet somebody can still add entries to
> the cache? What happens when somebody else tries to initialize this
> cache? All the entries there will be lost, even though nobody
> discarded it afterwards.
And yet it works, and your patch breaks it.
diff --git i/t/t7501-commit.sh w/t/t7501-commit.sh
index 195e747..1608254 100755
--- i/t/t7501-commit.sh
+++ w/t/t7501-commit.sh
@@ -524,4 +524,16 @@ test_expect_success 'commit a file whose name is a dash' '
test_i18ngrep " changed, 5 insertions" output
'
+test_expect_success '--only works on to-be-born branch' '
+ git checkout --orphan orphan &&
+ echo foo >newfile &&
+ git add newfile &&
+ git commit --only newfile -m"--only on unborn branch" &&
+ cat >expected <<EOF &&
+100644 blob 257cc5642cb1a054f08cc83f2d943e56fd3ebe99 newfile
+EOF
+ git ls-tree -r HEAD >actual &&
+ test_cmp expected actual
+'
+
test_done
--
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