From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jens Lehmann Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Add optional parameters to the diff option "--ignore-submodules" Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2010 08:23:17 +0200 Message-ID: <4C0F3355.7050202@web.de> References: <4C0E7037.8080403@web.de> <201006090011.14995.johan@herland.net> <4C0EC201.9060309@web.de> <201006090149.22027.johan@herland.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Junio C Hamano , Andy Parkins , Johannes Schindelin To: Johan Herland X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Jun 09 08:23:27 2010 connect(): No such file or directory 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 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OMEhB-0000H2-Rk for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Wed, 09 Jun 2010 08:23:26 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753596Ab0FIGXU (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Jun 2010 02:23:20 -0400 Received: from fmmailgate01.web.de ([217.72.192.221]:34022 "EHLO fmmailgate01.web.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753458Ab0FIGXT (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Jun 2010 02:23:19 -0400 Received: from smtp06.web.de ( [172.20.5.172]) by fmmailgate01.web.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4507B15E05FA0; Wed, 9 Jun 2010 08:23:18 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [80.128.93.210] (helo=[192.168.178.26]) by smtp06.web.de with asmtp (WEB.DE 4.110 #4) id 1OMEh4-0001VT-00; Wed, 09 Jun 2010 08:23:18 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; de; rv:1.9.1.9) Gecko/20100317 Thunderbird/3.0.4 In-Reply-To: <201006090149.22027.johan@herland.net> X-Sender: Jens.Lehmann@web.de X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1/fhtaJx4e/PlyYyqFtmWJTqjclCDTx4bBcu0id Vp42eu9NfsJ43FhH2SNmV7s9pNt7pxRNP/8VcgZwio0JNu4xGk Gytz2zTMFdgAIIlDIuMQ== Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Am 09.06.2010 01:49, schrieb Johan Herland: > On Wednesday 09 June 2010, Jens Lehmann wrote: >> There are currently (since 1.7.0) three reasons a submodule is considered >> dirty: >> >> 1) It contains untracked content >> 2) It contains modified tracked content >> 3) It contains newer commits than those committed in the superproject > > I guess 3) really means that the submodule's HEAD points to a _different_ > (not necessarily _newer_) commit than what's referenced in the superproject. Sure, please replace my inaccurate description with yours ;-) >> "all" would ignore 1), 2) & 3) >> "dirty" would ignore 1) & 2) >> "untracked" would ignore 1) > > ...and just to complete my understanding of this, 3) requires only checking > the submodule's current HEAD, while 1) and 2) require traversing its work > tree (i.e. the equivalent of a 'git status'), hence the potential > expensiveness. Thats correct. > Also, I guess 2) includes both staged and unstaged modifications to tracked > content? Yes (as it doesn't make a difference to the superproject if modifications inside the submodule are staged or not there is no distinction made between those two). > Thanks for your help. All the ideas in your cover letter seem good to me. Thank you for your comments, I'll start hacking to show some more patches.