Re: Usability improvement request: git show revision -- file

[Piotr Krukowiecki <piotr.krukowiecki@gmail.com>]

On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 9:50 AM, Michael J Gruber
<git@drmicha.warpmail.net> wrote:
> Piotr Krukowiecki venit, vidit, dixit 31.03.2011 08:45:
>> Hi,
>>
>> if there's existing way to do this please tell me.
>>
>> There's this file "src/subdir/file". I'm in the "src" directory and want to
>> see the "file" at specific revision.
>>
>> Knowing about git show I'd expect something like this to work:
>>
>>    $ git show master -- subdir/file
>>
>> But it shows nothing (no output, no warning).
>
> ...because you are asking git to show the commit master, filtered by
> subdir/file, and if that file is not changed there, the commit is not

It wasn't - I was doing git-blame and wanted to see file as it was before
the blamed commit.


> selected. If it is changed there, it shows you only the diff affecting

I see - that makes sense too.


> that file. (We might want to change this to filter the diff only.)

Not sure what you mean by that?


>> Following also does not
>> work as expected:
>>
>>    $ git show master:subdir/file
>>    fatal: Path 'src/subdir/file' exists, but not 'subdir/file'.
>>    Did you mean 'master:src/subdir/file'?
>
> But git is really understanding about your situation, isn't it? ;)

Yeah, but this looks like a workround for a common problem -
people specify relative path a lot, so a warning was added.


>> Of course following works:
>>
>>    $ git show master:src/subdir/file
>>
>> but it's not very convenient to have to specify full path, and it's not what
>> you would expect given that most other commands accept "-- relativepath"
>> syntax.
>
> It's not the command in this case, but the "commit:pathspec" syntax, and
> for every command which understands it, it is relative to root (i.e.
> expects a full path). But we do have a syntax for relative:
>
> git show master:./subdir/file

Thanks, I'll try to remember. I don't have a better idea for solving
this problem.


-- 
Piotr Krukowiecki