From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Johannes Sixt Subject: Re: Unmodified submodules shows up as dirty with 1.6.6.443.gd7346 Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2010 08:13:37 +0100 Message-ID: <4B555BA1.90605@viscovery.net> 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: Gustaf Hendeby , git@vger.kernel.org, Jens.Lehmann@web.de To: Jacob Helwig X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Jan 19 08:13:48 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 1NX8HZ-0004O0-Cm for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Tue, 19 Jan 2010 08:13:45 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754269Ab0ASHNk (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Jan 2010 02:13:40 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754138Ab0ASHNk (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Jan 2010 02:13:40 -0500 Received: from lilzmailso01.liwest.at ([212.33.55.23]:28375 "EHLO lilzmailso02.liwest.at" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754059Ab0ASHNk (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Jan 2010 02:13:40 -0500 Received: from cpe228-254.liwest.at ([81.10.228.254] helo=theia.linz.viscovery) by lilzmailso02.liwest.at with esmtpa (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NX8HS-0004YI-8O; Tue, 19 Jan 2010 08:13:38 +0100 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (J6T.linz.viscovery [192.168.1.95]) by theia.linz.viscovery (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0168E1660F; Tue, 19 Jan 2010 08:13:37 +0100 (CET) User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (Windows/20090812) In-Reply-To: <8c9a061001180802t5ec0d389j2cae9f1771130c36@mail.gmail.com> X-Spam-Score: 1.9 (+) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Jacob Helwig schrieb: > 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. But isn't it a bug that a submodule is considered dirty just because an untracked file appears? -- Hannes