Am 14.09.2016 um 23:07 schrieb Thomas Gummerer:
> When the chmod option was added to git add, it was hooked up to the diff
> machinery, meaning that it only works when the version in the index
> differs from the version on disk.
>
> As the option was supposed to mirror the chmod option in update-index,
> which always changes the mode in the index, regardless of the status of
> the file, make sure the option behaves the same way in git add.
>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gummerer <t.gummerer@xxxxxxxxx>
Sorry for replying almost a year late, hopefully you're still interested.
> ---
> builtin/add.c | 47 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------
> builtin/checkout.c | 2 +-
> builtin/commit.c | 2 +-
> cache.h | 10 +++++-----
> read-cache.c | 14 ++++++--------
> t/t3700-add.sh | 50 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 6 files changed, 91 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/builtin/add.c b/builtin/add.c
> index b1dddb4..595a0b2 100644
> --- a/builtin/add.c
> +++ b/builtin/add.c
> @@ -26,10 +26,25 @@ static int patch_interactive, add_interactive, edit_interactive;
> static int take_worktree_changes;
>
> struct update_callback_data {
> - int flags, force_mode;
> + int flags;
> int add_errors;
> };
>
> +static void chmod_pathspec(struct pathspec *pathspec, int force_mode)
"int force_mode" looks like a binary (or perhaps ternary) flag, but
actually it is a character and can only have the values '-' or '+'.
In builtin/update-index.c it's called "char flip" and we probably should
define it like this here as well.
> +{
> + int i;
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < active_nr; i++) {
> + struct cache_entry *ce = active_cache[i];
> +
> + if (pathspec && !ce_path_match(ce, pathspec, NULL))
> + continue;
> +
> + if (chmod_cache_entry(ce, force_mode) < 0)
> + fprintf(stderr, "cannot chmod '%s'", ce->name);
This error message is missing a newline. In builtin/update-index.c we
also show the attempted change (-x or +x); perhaps we want to do that
here as well.
Currently chmod_cache_entry() can only fail if ce is not a regular
file or it's other parameter is neither '-' nor '+'. We rule out the
latter already in the argument parsing code. The former can happen if
we add a symlink, either explicitly or because it's in a directory
we're specified.
I wonder if we even need to report anything, or under which conditions.
If you have a file named dir/file and a symlink named dir/symlink then
the interesting cases are:
git add --chmod=.. dir/symlink
git add --chmod=.. dir/file dir/symlink
git add --chmod=.. dir
Warning about each case may be the most cautious thing to do, but
documenting that --chmod has no effect on symlinks and keeping silent
might be less annoying, especially in the last case. What do you
think?
> @@ -342,13 +354,8 @@ int cmd_add(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix)
> if (!show_only && ignore_missing)
> die(_("Option --ignore-missing can only be used together with --dry-run"));
>
> - if (!chmod_arg)
> - force_mode = 0;
> - else if (!strcmp(chmod_arg, "-x"))
> - force_mode = 0666;
> - else if (!strcmp(chmod_arg, "+x"))
> - force_mode = 0777;
> - else
> + if (chmod_arg && ((chmod_arg[0] != '-' && chmod_arg[0] != '+') ||
> + chmod_arg[1] != 'x' || chmod_arg[2]))
> die(_("--chmod param '%s' must be either -x or +x"), chmod_arg);
That's the argument parsing code mentioned above. The strcmp-based
checks look nicer to me btw. How about this?
if (chmod_arg && strcmp(chmod_arg, "-x") && strcmp(chmod_arg, "+x"))
But that's just nitpicking.
René
