From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Gustaf Hendeby Subject: Re: Unmodified submodules shows up as dirty with 1.6.6.443.gd7346 Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2010 17:54:44 +0100 Message-ID: <4B549254.5090206@isy.liu.se> References: <4B547EA6.5070203@isy.liu.se> <8c9a061001180802t5ec0d389j2cae9f1771130c36@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Jens.Lehmann@web.de To: Jacob Helwig X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Jan 18 17:54:35 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1NWus4-0004cV-Sf for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Mon, 18 Jan 2010 17:54:33 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752544Ab0ARQy3 (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Jan 2010 11:54:29 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752380Ab0ARQy3 (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Jan 2010 11:54:29 -0500 Received: from mailgw1.uni-kl.de ([131.246.120.220]:50925 "EHLO mailgw1.uni-kl.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751624Ab0ARQy2 (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Jan 2010 11:54:28 -0500 Received: from dfki.uni-kl.de (dfki-1002.dfki.uni-kl.de [131.246.195.2]) by mailgw1.uni-kl.de (8.13.8/8.13.8/Debian-3) with ESMTP id o0IGsO9O008095; Mon, 18 Jan 2010 17:54:24 +0100 Received: from serv-2100.kl.dfki.de (serv-2100.kl.dfki.de [192.168.21.180]) by dfki.uni-kl.de (8.13.8+Sun/8.11.4) with ESMTP id o0IGsNnZ003019; Mon, 18 Jan 2010 17:54:23 +0100 (CET) Received: from [192.168.21.153] (pc-2163.kl.dfki.de [192.168.21.153]) by serv-2100.kl.dfki.de (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o0IGsNBA010842; Mon, 18 Jan 2010 17:54:23 +0100 (CET) User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (X11/20090817) In-Reply-To: <8c9a061001180802t5ec0d389j2cae9f1771130c36@mail.gmail.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.7 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Jacob Helwig wrote: > On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 07:30, Gustaf Hendeby wrote: >> Hi! >> >> I have been using submodules for a while, and been quite happy with >> them. Just updating to the latest next (1.6.6.443.gd7346), a strange >> problem has occurred. All my submodules (which are in fact unmodified) >> show as modified and dirty >> >> diff --git a/extern/utils b/extern/utils >> --- a/extern/utils >> +++ b/extern/utils >> @@ -1 +1 @@ >> -Subproject commit 6bad20e1419f1ca61bd5a6eef9b5937122e006f1 >> +Subproject commit 6bad20e1419f1ca61bd5a6eef9b5937122e006f1-dirty >> >> > Do you have any untracked files in the submodule? git status is > working as I would expect with the same version (1.6.6.443.gd7346). Yes, I do. > > If there is no output from git status in the submodule, then git > status in the superproject shows the submodule as being clean. > However, if there is _any_ output from git status (untracked files, > modified files, deleted files, new files), then the superproject shows > the submodule as being dirty. > Then the behavior of this feature differs from the one provided by GIT-VERSION-GEN that is used as part of the git build process. This is not an argument itself, but personally, I don't like this behavior, and think it should be reconsidered before inclusion into master. I have the following use case, which is affected. I have with in a submodule some code that needs to be compiled, and hence generate some object files and other files in the process. I don't want to include these files in a .gitignore as they are named differently on different systems. Hence, I include them in my .git/info/exclude file, where I am developing the module. So now, unless I do the same thing for all places I checkout the repo as submodule, I end up with the module indicated as dirty after I compile it. This is a bit inconvenient. Am I the only one who uses submodules this way? Is there a better way to solve my problem that would provide a better work pattern in this case? /Gustaf