On Wed, Nov 3, 2021 at 9:47 AM Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > "Lessley Dennington via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@xxxxxxxxx> > writes: > > > We do not include paths outside the sparse checkout cone because blame > > currently does not support blaming files outside of the sparse definition. > > Attempting to do so fails with the following error: > > > > fatal: no such path '<path outside sparse definition>' in HEAD > > Does this indicate that we need to update how the command line > safety in verify_working_tree_path() works in a sparsely checked out > working tree? I wondered the same thing, but no I don't think we need any extra command line safety here. The behavior Lessley is reporting here is equivalent to the following in a regular (non-sparse) checkout: $ rm t/test-lib.sh $ git blame t/test-lib.sh fatal: Cannot lstat 't/test-lib.sh': No such file or directory $ git blame -- t/test-lib.sh fatal: Cannot lstat 't/test-lib.sh': No such file or directory blame without a revision has always failed for files not in the working tree, regardless of whether those files are found in the index or HEAD. > If foo/bar is outside the sparse definition, > > git blame HEAD foo/bar Actually, that works; there's no error and the code with Lessley's patch will show the blame info for foo/bar (assuming foo/bar was a path in HEAD, of course). > may get such a message, but shouldn't > > git blame HEAD -- foo/bar > > make it work? This also works. But both of these things are kind of testing something different; when given a revision, the checkout is irrelevant to git blame: git blame with a revision will work regardless of whether the checkout is full, sparse, completely empty, or non-existent (i.e. a bare clone). > > -# TODO: blame currently does not support blaming files outside of the > > -# sparse definition. It complains that the file doesn't exist locally. > > -test_expect_failure 'blame with pathspec outside sparse definition' ' > > +# Blame does not support blaming files outside of the sparse > > +# definition, so we verify this scenario. > > IOW, why is it a good idea to drop the "TODO" and "currently" and pretend > as if the current behaviour is the desirable one? I think dropping the TODO is correct, but the wording is confusing -- it has nothing to do with sparse checkouts. I'd rather say, "Without a specified revision, blame will only handle files present in the current working directory and error on any other paths" > > +test_expect_success 'blame with pathspec outside sparse definition' ' > > init_repos && > > + test_sparse_match git sparse-checkout set && > > > > - test_all_match git blame folder1/a && > > - test_all_match git blame folder2/a && > > - test_all_match git blame deep/deeper2/a && > > - test_all_match git blame deep/deeper2/deepest/a > > + for file in a \ > > + deep/a \ > > + deep/deeper1/a \ > > + deep/deeper1/deepest/a > > + do > > + test_sparse_match test_must_fail git blame $file && > > + cat >expect <<-EOF && > > + fatal: Cannot lstat '"'"'$file'"'"': No such file or directory > > + EOF > > + # We compare sparse-checkout-err and sparse-index-err in > > + # `test_sparse_match`. Given we know they are the same, we > > + # only check the content of sparse-index-err here. > > + test_cmp expect sparse-index-err > > + done > > ' > > > > test_expect_success 'checkout and reset (mixed)' ' > > @@ -878,6 +892,18 @@ test_expect_success 'sparse index is not expanded: diff' ' > > ensure_not_expanded diff --staged > > ' > > > > +test_expect_success 'sparse index is not expanded: blame' ' > > + init_repos && > > + > > + for file in a \ > > + deep/a \ > > + deep/deeper1/a \ > > + deep/deeper1/deepest/a > > + do > > + ensure_not_expanded blame $file > > + done > > +' > > + > > # NEEDSWORK: a sparse-checkout behaves differently from a full checkout > > # in this scenario, but it shouldn't. > > test_expect_success 'reset mixed and checkout orphan' '
