bug? - git-checkout treeish paths ignores deleted files
Shouldn't "git checkout topic path" make the directory tree rooted at path identical to what is on branch topic? It doesn't.
Try this:
mkdir test
cd test
git init
touch a b
git add a b
git commit -m 'base'
git checkout -b topic
git rm a
git commit -m 'removed a'
git checkout master
git checkout topic .
...and the result is...
ls
a b
instead of
b
Mark
Quoted 17 lines · Mark Levedahl
Shouldn't "git checkout topic path" make the directory tree
rooted at path identical to what is on branch topic? It doesn't.Try this:
mkdir test
cd test
git init
touch a b
git add a b
git commit -m 'base'
git checkout -b topic
git rm a
git commit -m 'removed a'
git checkout master
git checkout topic .
Quoted 6 lines
...and the result is...
ls
a binstead of
b
No, the behaviour is correct.
- first you removed the file on the topic branch; at the same time you removed it from your working tree
- then you switched back to the master branch and so the file was added back to your working tree
- then you switched back to the topic branch, and seeing as the file "a" is not being tracked in the topic branch Git doesn't touch it
In general, Git only meddles with stuff that you've told it to track. This is actually a good thing in most cases because it makes some workflows involving dirty trees or trees with untracked content somewhat more convenient.
Cheers,
Wincent
Quoted 15 lines · Wincent Colaiuta
Quoted 3 lines · Mark Levedahl
Shouldn't "git checkout topic path" make the directory tree rooted at path identical to what is on branch topic? It doesn't.
No, the behaviour is correct.
- first you removed the file on the topic branch; at the same time you removed it from your working tree
- then you switched back to the master branch and so the file was added back to your working tree
- then you switched back to the topic branch, and seeing as the file "a" is not being tracked in the topic branch Git doesn't touch it
Quoted 6 lines
In general, Git only meddles with stuff that you've told it to track. This is actually a good thing in most cases because it makes some workflows involving dirty trees or trees with untracked content somewhat more convenient.
Cheers,
Wincent
I'm not convinced...
"git checkout branch dir" should make dir have the same value it would get if I just did "git checkout branch". The latter command will ignore files only if they are untracked in *both* HEAD and branch. I fail to see why the path-limited version of git-checkout should give a different result on the part it is asked to affect than the non-path limited version. This is very inconsistent and I'm having a hard time understanding what workflow it will help.
Mark
Quoted 9 lines · Mark Levedahl
I'm not convinced...
"git checkout branch dir" should make dir have the same value it would get if I just did "git checkout branch". The latter command will ignore files only if they are untracked in *both* HEAD and branch. I fail to see why the path-limited version of git-checkout should give a different result on the part it is asked to affect than the non-path limited version. This is very inconsistent and I'm having a hard time understanding what workflow it will help.
I don't know the historical reasons for the difference but it's explained in the second para of the man page:
When <paths> are given, this command does not switch branches. It updates the named paths in the working tree from the index file
(i.e.
it runs git-checkout-index -f -u), or from a named commit.
So when you supply "." as a path it's not actually switching branches. So that's why you see the different behaviour; it's intentionally different. Like I said, I don't know the reasons why but I imagine it's to make it easy to grab specific files from other branches without actually switching.
Cheers,
Wincent