From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Heiko Voigt Subject: Re: Re: Git issues with submodules Date: Sun, 24 Nov 2013 01:52:56 +0100 Message-ID: <20131124005256.GA3500@sandbox-ub> References: <20131122151120.GA32361@sigill.intra.peff.net> <528FC638.5060403@web.de> <20131122215454.GA4952@sandbox-ub> <20131122220953.GI4212@google.com> <52910BC4.1030800@web.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Jonathan Nieder , Ramkumar Ramachandra , Sergey Sharybin , Jeff King , Git List , Junio C Hamano To: Jens Lehmann X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sun Nov 24 01:53:11 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1VkNwl-0000Ri-Cv for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Sun, 24 Nov 2013 01:53:11 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756223Ab3KXAxH (ORCPT ); Sat, 23 Nov 2013 19:53:07 -0500 Received: from smtprelay03.ispgateway.de ([80.67.31.30]:50974 "EHLO smtprelay03.ispgateway.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755991Ab3KXAxF (ORCPT ); Sat, 23 Nov 2013 19:53:05 -0500 Received: from [77.20.34.36] (helo=sandbox-ub) by smtprelay03.ispgateway.de with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.68) (envelope-from ) id 1VkNwb-0000Kl-GS; Sun, 24 Nov 2013 01:53:01 +0100 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <52910BC4.1030800@web.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-Df-Sender: aHZvaWd0QGh2b2lndC5uZXQ= Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Hi, On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 09:10:44PM +0100, Jens Lehmann wrote: > Am 22.11.2013 23:09, schrieb Jonathan Nieder: > > Heiko Voigt wrote: > > > >> After that we can discuss whether add should add submodules that are > >> tracked but not shown. How about commit -a ? Should it also ignore the > >> change? I am undecided here. There does not seem to be any good > >> decision. From the users point of view we should probably not add it > >> since its not visible in status. What do others think? > > > > I agree --- it should not add. > > I concur: adding a change that is hidden from the user during > the process is not a good idea. Here is a patch achieving that. Still missing a test which I will add. Cheers Heiko ---8<---- Subject: [PATCH] fix 'git add' to skip submodules configured as ignored If submodules are configured as ignore=all they are not shown by status. Lets also ignore them when adding files to the index. This avoids that users accidentially add ignored submodules with: git add . We achieve this by reading the submodule config and thus correctly initializing the infrastructure to take the ignore decision. Signed-off-by: Heiko Voigt --- builtin/add.c | 6 ++++++ 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) diff --git a/builtin/add.c b/builtin/add.c index 226f758..2d0d2ef 100644 --- a/builtin/add.c +++ b/builtin/add.c @@ -15,6 +15,7 @@ #include "diffcore.h" #include "revision.h" #include "bulk-checkin.h" +#include "submodule.h" static const char * const builtin_add_usage[] = { N_("git add [options] [--] ..."), @@ -378,6 +379,10 @@ static int add_config(const char *var, const char *value, void *cb) ignore_add_errors = git_config_bool(var, value); return 0; } + + if (!prefixcmp(var, "submodule.")) + return parse_submodule_config_option(var, value); + return git_default_config(var, value, cb); } @@ -415,6 +420,7 @@ int cmd_add(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix) int implicit_dot = 0; struct update_callback_data update_data; + gitmodules_config(); git_config(add_config, NULL); argc = parse_options(argc, argv, prefix, builtin_add_options, -- 1.8.5.rc3.1.gbe2a8c7