From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: Suggestion: make git checkout safer Date: Wed, 3 Jun 2015 15:06:16 -0400 Message-ID: <20150603190616.GA28488@peff.net> References: <20150603090654.GD32000@peff.net> <20150603093514.GF32000@peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: Ed Avis , git@vger.kernel.org To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Jun 03 21:06:34 2015 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 1Z0Dzh-0008I0-1M for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Wed, 03 Jun 2015 21:06:29 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755866AbbFCTGY (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Jun 2015 15:06:24 -0400 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([50.56.180.127]:40681 "HELO cloud.peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1758602AbbFCTGT (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Jun 2015 15:06:19 -0400 Received: (qmail 11910 invoked by uid 102); 3 Jun 2015 19:06:19 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.1) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with SMTP; Wed, 03 Jun 2015 14:06:19 -0500 Received: (qmail 23943 invoked by uid 107); 3 Jun 2015 19:06:20 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with SMTP; Wed, 03 Jun 2015 15:06:20 -0400 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Wed, 03 Jun 2015 15:06:16 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Wed, Jun 03, 2015 at 10:32:40AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > "git checkout $paths" (and you can give "." for $paths to mean > "everything") is akin to "cp -R $elsewhere/$path ." to restore the > working tree copies from somewhere else. > > "Ouch, 'git checkout .' overwrote what was in my working tree" is > exactly the same kind of confusion as "I ran 'cp -r ../saved .' and > it overwrote everything". As you said in your initial response, > that is what the command is meant for. > > What does that similar command outside world, "cp", have for "more > safety"? 'cp -i' asks if the user wants to overwrite a file for > each path; perhaps a behaviour similar to that was the original > poster wanted to see? Yeah, I'd say "cp -i" is the closest thing. I don't have a problem with adding that, but I'd really hate for it to be the default (just as I find distros which "alias rm='rm -i" annoying). -Peff