Junio C Hamano wrote:
> "Anders Melchiorsen" <mail@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
>> Junio C Hamano wrote:
>>
>>> What's the use case of using -m together with --with-tree to begin
>>> with?
>>
>> The script runs
>>
>> git ls-files -d -m -o -t --with-tree=HEAD
>>
>> to get a parseable "git status"-like output. If I leave out
>> --with-tree=HEAD, I do not get information about staged changes.
>
> [...]
> I lack the context to interpret what you mean by "The script", but in any
> case, the only use case --with-tree was designed for was to use it in
> conjunction with --error-unmatch inside the scripted version of "git
> commit", to see if the paths given by the users make sense as a request to
> create a partial commit. It is not entirely surprising if any other funny
> options do not work with it at all.
"The script" is just a random script I was writing when I found this issue.
If --with-tree is only meant for --error-unmatch, maybe update the help to
show it like this,
[--error-unmatch [--with-tree=<tree-ish>]]
I never read the description of --with-tree, I just found the parameter in
the top of the man page and tried it out. It did what I wanted, but gave
double output. And so I reported that in this thread, as I believed it to
be an error.
Now I understand that I am using ls-files in unintended ways, but I cannot
really fix that when no "git status" like plumbing tool is available.
> Having said all that, I think this would fix it.
That sure seems to fix my test case.
Anders.
--
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
