git commit (or git-commit-script) question
Hey all,
git-commit-script --help says:
git commit [-a] [-m <message>] [-F <logfile>] [(-C|-c) <commit>] [<path>...]
That made me assume that if I do:
git-commit-script somedir
it would *only* commit the changes I've made in "somedir", but it appears to commit *all* files that have changed (and shows all files in the list of changed files in the commit message it displays in the editor), as if it's completely ignoring the <path> argument.
Known problem? I got this using git that I pulled from kernel.org earlier this morning.
Signature · 1 line
jst
Quoted 5 lines · Johnny Stenback
That made me assume that if I do:
git-commit-script somedir
Quoted 7 lines
it would *only* commit the changes I've made in "somedir", but it appears to commit *all* files that have changed (and shows all files in the list of changed files in the commit message it displays in the editor), as if it's completely ignoring the <path> argument.
Known problem? I got this using git that I pulled from kernel.org earlier this morning.
It works for me. You _should_ see something like
# # Updated but not checked in: # (will commit) # # modified: somedir/somefile # # # Changed but not updated: # (use git-update-cache to mark for commit) # # modified: otherdir/anotherfile #
which basically means that it will commit "somedir/somefile", but _not_ commit "otherdir/anotherfile".
However, one thing to look out for is that if you've marked any files for update (with git-update-cache) those will always be committed regardless of what arguments you give to "git commit". You can reset the index with "git reset" if you decided that you don't want to commit after all.
(For example, if you do a "git commit --all", but decide not to commit after all by writing an empty commit message, that will already have marked all the files to be committed, so next time, even if you then use "git commit somedir", all the files in all the _other_ dirs have already been marked for update, so you'll see everything being committed).
Linus
Ah, that explains it. I had already marked all my changes for update, that's what threw me off here. Thanks!
Quoted 37 lines · Linus Torvalds
Quoted 7 lines · Johnny Stenback
That made me assume that if I do:
git-commit-script somedir
it would *only* commit the changes I've made in "somedir", but it appears to commit *all* files that have changed (and shows all files in the list of changed files in the commit message it displays in the editor), as if it's completely ignoring the <path> argument.
Known problem? I got this using git that I pulled from kernel.org earlier this morning.
It works for me. You _should_ see something like
# # Updated but not checked in: # (will commit) # # modified: somedir/somefile # # # Changed but not updated: # (use git-update-cache to mark for commit) # # modified: otherdir/anotherfile #which basically means that it will commit "somedir/somefile", but _not_ commit "otherdir/anotherfile".
However, one thing to look out for is that if you've marked any files for update (with git-update-cache) those will always be committed regardless of what arguments you give to "git commit". You can reset the index with "git reset" if you decided that you don't want to commit after all.
(For example, if you do a "git commit --all", but decide not to commit after all by writing an empty commit message, that will already have marked all the files to be committed, so next time, even if you then use "git commit somedir", all the files in all the _other_ dirs have already been marked for update, so you'll see everything being committed).
Linus
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Signature · 1 line
jst
Quoted 3 lines · Linus Torvalds
However, one thing to look out for is that if you've marked any files for update (with git-update-cache) those will always be committed regardless of what arguments you give to "git commit".
Another thing to look out for is that the files you told it about with "git add" will be included and does not show up in "git diff", because there currently is no way to record "intent to add" (rather, "Mr GIT, please keep an eye on this file") without actually adding a path to the index file for inclusion in the next commit.
I have a couple of updates to git-commit-script in the proposed updates branch, and one of the changes is that git-update-cache in git-commit-script, used when either the --all flag or explicit paths are given, has a --remove flag there. The reason it does not need --add flag there as well is a direct consequence of this asymmetry.
Although I do not think this asymmetry a major source of confusion, I suspect that we could "fix" it by treating an index entry with all-zero mode and sha1 as "keep-an-eye-on" entry with a new flag "git-update-cache --watch <path>" or something like that. "git-diff-files" would then treat that special entry as a nonexistent path and would compare it with whatever happens to be (or lack of it) in the working tree, and "git diff" would show a diff that creates the file. This needs a tweak or two in the diffcore machinery as well.