Samuel Tardieu wrote:
I renamed a file in my repository, and made a slightly modified copy
of it. It looks like GIT gets confused on which one is the renaming
and which one is the copy, and doesn't favour the 100% identical one
to be chosen as the renaming.
Not a big deal, but maybe git could be more clever here.
% git commit -m "Split into flash and ram alternatives."
[stm32-sk 601462c] Split into flash and ram alternatives.
3 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
copy Demo/CORTEX_STM32SK_GCC/{stm32f103r8t6.ld => stm32f103r8t6_flash.ld} (100%)
rename Demo/CORTEX_STM32SK_GCC/{stm32f103r8t6.ld => stm32f103r8t6_ram.ld} (98%)
There isn't that much more to be clever about, really. One is a rename+edit,
the other is a copy. The other way around would have been copy+edit + rename
which isn't necessarily an improvement.
Looking at how git internally[1] does things and remembering the meanings of
"copy" and "rename" though, it makes perfect sense to leave it as-is.
[1].
In git, the content is part of the (object) name, so changing the content
makes it closer to a rename than a copy, while changing the location always
makes it a copy, although sometimes coupled with a delete.
--
Andreas Ericsson andreas.ericsson@xxxxxx
OP5 AB www.op5.se
Tel: +46 8-230225 Fax: +46 8-230231
Considering the successes of the wars on alcohol, poverty, drugs and
terror, I think we should give some serious thought to declaring war
on peace.
--
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
