Re: [PATCH v2 06/10] sparse-checkout: --no-sparse-index needs a full index

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



"Derrick Stolee via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@xxxxxxxxx> writes:

> From: Derrick Stolee <dstolee@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> When the --no-sparse-index option is supplied, the sparse-checkout
> builtin should explicitly ask to expand a sparse index to a full one.
> This is currently done implicitly due to the command_requires_full_index
> protection, but that will be removed in an upcoming change.
>
> Signed-off-by: Derrick Stolee <derrickstolee@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  builtin/sparse-checkout.c | 3 +++
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/builtin/sparse-checkout.c b/builtin/sparse-checkout.c
> index 88eea069ad4..cbff6ad00b0 100644
> --- a/builtin/sparse-checkout.c
> +++ b/builtin/sparse-checkout.c
> @@ -413,6 +413,9 @@ static int update_modes(int *cone_mode, int *sparse_index)
>  		/* force an index rewrite */
>  		repo_read_index(the_repository);
>  		the_repository->index->updated_workdir = 1;
> +
> +		if (!*sparse_index)
> +			ensure_full_index(the_repository->index);

init_opts.sparse_index is initialized to -1 (unknown) and parse_options()
may set it to 0 (false) or 1 (true).  We call ensure_full only when
the caller explicitly asks with --no-sparse-index.

Makes sense.

>  	}
>  
>  	return 0;



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux