Re: is there an easier way to do this ?

["Zorba" <cr@altmore.co.uk>]

The manual shows you can SHOW untracked files, but not add them as part of 
the commit -a jig

Seems a bit strange that git-add operates on both exisging and new files 
when used standalone, but its behaviour changes when encapsulated in 
commit -a...

So, I thought maybe $ git commit -a, then $ git add .
but then the files tracked have missed the commit boat they were meant to be 
on, haven't they,

hang on -
what about

$ git add .
$ git commit -a

I do believe I've cracked it
if so, it seems a bit wasteful, 2x adds (one explicti and one embedded 
in -a) ? shame on you linux kernel guys, i'd have expected better :-)

"Zorba" <cr@altmore.co.uk> wrote in message 
news:gjc52u$ehc$4@ger.gmane.org...
> ok, now I'm in this for real, archiving versions of our website project 
> (5k files approx)
>
> so here is the workflow:
>
> - copy version 1 files into GIT dir
>
> - open git bash
>
> $ git init
>
> $ git add .
>
> $ git commit -m "version1"
>
> all vanilla ? cool
> next job = store version 2, so delete version 1 files from GIT dir, copy 
> in version 2
> version2 has different files from 1 - which ones? Out of 5k files could be 
> 1% = 50 new ones, and same amount removed. Why should I care, with such a 
> powerful friend as git around, n'est pas?
> THIS TIME we are going to be CLEVER and use "-a" flag on commit to pick up 
> any files that have been REMOVED (or "deleted" in git-speak)
>
> $ git commit -a -m "version2"
>
> BUT this does not pick up any new ones that have been added,
>
> and when we run
>
> $ git status > ../git_status.txt
>
> these are referred to as "untracked files"
> only problem there are 50 ish
> is there not another flag on git commit to treat any untracked file as a 
> new file ?
> (would save me typing or creating a list out of these untracked ones and 
> feeding them into git add)
>
> I know, I realise now I should have looked up git-commit in the manual - 
> in case its not there, pls enlighten me !
>
>
>