From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
To: "Elijah Newren via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@gmail.com>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, matheus.bernardino@usp.br,
dstolee@microsoft.com, Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>,
chris.torek@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] stash: remove unnecessary process forking
Date: Tue, 01 Dec 2020 15:02:32 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <xmqqr1o9m8on.fsf@gitster.c.googlers.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1fa263cf3c3d1b0c20ad89e6454a7b903a07f193.1606861519.git.gitgitgadget@gmail.com> (Elijah Newren via GitGitGadget's message of "Tue, 01 Dec 2020 22:25:17 +0000")
"Elijah Newren via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@gmail.com> writes:
> git diff-index --cached --name-only --diff-filter=A $CTREE >"$a"
> git read-tree --reset $CTREE
> git update-index --add --stdin <"$a"
> rm -f "$a"
This is orthogonal to what this patch does, as this is supposed to
be just bug-for-bug compatible rewrite.
But I wonder if the above sequence, whether it is done as a series
of plumbing invocations or subroutine calls, is a relic dating back
in the days before i-t-a existed. If we want to revert the changes
to the index for working tree files for removed or modified ones, I
do not offhand see a good reason why we would want to keep the
contents to new paths---if i-t-a were available when the sequence
was designed, I suspect we would just have added the path as i-t-a
in order to keep track of the presence of the path but not
necessarily the contents in it.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-12-01 23:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-11-20 16:53 [PATCH 0/3] Fix stash apply in sparse checkouts (and a submodule test) Elijah Newren via GitGitGadget
2020-11-20 16:53 ` [PATCH 1/3] t7012: add a testcase demonstrating stash apply bugs in sparse checkouts Elijah Newren via GitGitGadget
2020-11-20 16:53 ` [PATCH 2/3] stash: remove unnecessary process forking Elijah Newren via GitGitGadget
2020-11-20 16:53 ` [PATCH 3/3] stash: fix stash application in sparse-checkouts Elijah Newren via GitGitGadget
2020-11-21 12:47 ` Chris Torek
2020-11-22 3:47 ` Elijah Newren
2020-11-25 22:14 ` [PATCH 0/3] Fix stash apply in sparse checkouts (and a submodule test) Junio C Hamano
2020-11-26 5:31 ` Elijah Newren
2020-12-01 22:25 ` [PATCH v2 " Elijah Newren via GitGitGadget
2020-12-01 22:25 ` [PATCH v2 1/3] t7012: add a testcase demonstrating stash apply bugs in sparse checkouts Elijah Newren via GitGitGadget
2020-12-01 22:25 ` [PATCH v2 2/3] stash: remove unnecessary process forking Elijah Newren via GitGitGadget
2020-12-01 23:02 ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2020-12-02 16:09 ` Elijah Newren
2020-12-01 22:25 ` [PATCH v2 3/3] stash: fix stash application in sparse-checkouts Elijah Newren via GitGitGadget
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=xmqqr1o9m8on.fsf@gitster.c.googlers.com \
--to=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=chris.torek@gmail.com \
--cc=dstolee@microsoft.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitgitgadget@gmail.com \
--cc=matheus.bernardino@usp.br \
--cc=newren@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://80x24.org/mirrors/git.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).