Documentation problems
Hi,
I'm trying to figure out what a ``tree-ish''. I cannot seem to use many of the commands until I know.
<tree-ish>
Indicates a tree, commit or tag object name. A command that takes a <tree-ish> argument ultimately wants to operate on a <tree> object but automatically dereferences <commit> and <tag> objects that point at a <tree>.
I need a translation. :( Thank you. Regards, Bruce
P.S. I have a SuSE installation with everything relating to GIT installed. The man pages reference commands like, "git-ls-tree --name-only" except that there isn't any such command. Unless you reverse engineer the implementation of "git", discover the /usr/lib/git directory and add it to your path. That hassle is rather inconvenient. More hints about where the git commands get squirreled away would be useful. Thank you.
Quoted 9 lines · Bruce Korb
I'm trying to figure out what a ``tree-ish''. I cannot seem to use many of the commands until I know.
<tree-ish>
Indicates a tree, commit or tag object name. A command that takes a <tree-ish> argument ultimately wants to operate on a <tree> object but automatically dereferences <commit> and <tag> objects that point at a <tree>.I need a translation. :( Thank you. Regards, Bruce
See gitglossary(7).
Andreas.
Signature · 3 lines
Andreas Schwab, [email protected] GPG Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756 01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5 "And now for something completely different."
Quoted 11 lines · Bruce Korb
Hi,
I'm trying to figure out what a ``tree-ish''. I cannot seem to use many of the commands until I know.
<tree-ish>
Indicates a tree, commit or tag object name. A command that takes a <tree-ish> argument ultimately wants to operate on a <tree> object but automatically dereferences <commit> and <tag> objects that point at a <tree>.I need a translation. :( Thank you. Regards, Bruce
tree = directory (with its content).
For example, the last commit in the current branch is a Git object of type "commit", which contains mostly a log message, a few headers, and a pointer to the tree object corresponding to the content of the directory in which you made the commit (modulo what you excluded from the commit of course). Therefore, the name of this commit, although not really a tree, is a tree-ish in that it talks about one and only one tree. You could name it HEAD, a sha1sum (like 5a2abc12d64a5e00daa6aebbb673715f365a564a), the name of the branch (like "master"), ...
Quoted 7 lines
P.S. I have a SuSE installation with everything relating to GIT installed. The man pages reference commands like, "git-ls-tree --name-only" except that there isn't any such command. Unless you reverse engineer the implementation of "git", discover the/usr/lib/gitdirectory and add it to your path. That hassle is rather inconvenient. More hints about where the git commands get squirreled away would be useful. Thank you.
Just type "git ls-tree --name-only". git-ls-tree is the old way to refer to the command name. Normally, any reference to dashed names should have been removed from the documentation by now (so most likely you see it in your distro because it's an old enough version, otherwise, it's a bug in the doc).
Signature · 2 lines
Matthieu Moy http://www-verimag.imag.fr/~moy/
Hi Matthieu,
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 3 lines
I'm trying to figure out what a ``tree-ish''.
I need a translation. :( Thank you. Regards, Bruce
tree = directory (with its content).
Quoted 9 lines
For example, the last commit in the current branch is a Git object of type "commit", which contains mostly a log message, a few headers, and a pointer to the tree object corresponding to the content of the directory in which you made the commit (modulo what you excluded from the commit of course). Therefore, the name of this commit, although not really a tree, is a tree-ish in that it talks about one and only one tree. You could name it HEAD, a sha1sum (like
5a2abc12d64a5e00daa6aebbb673715f365a564a), the name of the branch (like "master"), ...
Since I haven't created any any branches (to my knowledge), it seems that "master" is the magic branch name. My goal was just to get a list of managed files. Is "master" going to remain my "HEAD" now? (Assuming I don't do something to make a new branch. One branch is enough for my little one person project....)
Quoted 1 line
Just type "git ls-tree --name-only".
Ah. Thank you.
Quoted 5 lines
git-ls-tree is the old way to
refer to the command name. Normally, any reference to dashed names should have been removed from the documentation by now (so most likely you see it in your distro because it's an old enough version, otherwise, it's a bug in the doc).
$ git --version git version 1.6.0.2
I guess the man pages and installation were out of sync for that release.
Thank you for the quick reply! Regards, Bruce
Quoted 2 lines · Bruce Korb
Since I haven't created any any branches (to my knowledge), it seems that "master" is the magic branch name.
I wouldn't say "magic", but surely the default ;-).
Quoted 1 line
My goal was just to get a list of managed files.
Just cd /where/your/repo/is
git ls-files
Quoted 1 line
Is "master" going to remain my "HEAD" now?
Yes.
Quoted 10 lines
Quoted 5 lines
git-ls-tree is the old way to
refer to the command name. Normally, any reference to dashed names should have been removed from the documentation by now (so most likely you see it in your distro because it's an old enough version, otherwise, it's a bug in the doc).$ git --version git version 1.6.0.2I guess the man pages and installation were out of sync for that release.
Well, actually, a few more instances of dashed commands were removed more recently. That said, to get the doc for "git foo", you still have to type "man git-foo" (or git foo --help indeed), but that's because "man git foo" means something different to man.
Signature · 2 lines
Matthieu Moy http://www-verimag.imag.fr/~moy/