On 07/08/2016 06:36 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Torsten Bögershausen <tboegi@xxxxxx> writes:
I dunno. I really do not like that extra sha1 argument added all
over the callchain by this patch.
Or did you mean other calls to add_cacheinfo()?
I didn't mean too much - the whole call chain touches code where I
am not able to comment on details.
I'm happy to test other implementations, if someone suggests a
path, so to say.
I did a bit of experiment.
When 1/3 alone is applied, and then only changes for t/t6038 from
3/3 is picked, (i.e. we do not add the extra "don't look at index,
check this contents"), your "Merge addition of text=auto eol=CRLF"
test would fail.
And then with this further on top:
diff --git a/merge-recursive.c b/merge-recursive.c
index b880ae5..628c8ed 100644
--- a/merge-recursive.c
+++ b/merge-recursive.c
@@ -202,6 +202,9 @@ static int add_cacheinfo(unsigned int mode, const unsigned char *sha1,
const char *path, int stage, int refresh, int options)
{
struct cache_entry *ce;
+
+ if (!stage)
+ remove_file_from_cache(path);
ce = make_cache_entry(mode, sha1 ? sha1 : null_sha1, path, stage,
(refresh ? (CE_MATCH_REFRESH |
CE_MATCH_IGNORE_MISSING) : 0 ));
Thanks :-)
Did that experiment made it to a branch somewhere ?
--
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