From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: * [BUG] "git clean" does not pay attention to its parameters Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2007 18:14:57 -0800 Message-ID: <7vbq94in6m.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <200712050654.lB56scKk000311@mi0.bluebottle.com> <7veje1zibm.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> <20071205152816.GA21347@mediacenter.austin.rr.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Nanako Shiraishi , git@vger.kernel.org To: Shawn Bohrer X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Dec 06 03:16:49 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1J06IC-0007uf-Lp for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Thu, 06 Dec 2007 03:16:49 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755561AbXLFCPI (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Dec 2007 21:15:08 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754999AbXLFCPH (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Dec 2007 21:15:07 -0500 Received: from sceptre.pobox.com ([207.106.133.20]:55198 "EHLO sceptre.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755650AbXLFCPF (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Dec 2007 21:15:05 -0500 Received: from sceptre (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by sceptre.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 794E12F2; Wed, 5 Dec 2007 21:15:25 -0500 (EST) Received: from pobox.com (ip68-225-240-77.oc.oc.cox.net [68.225.240.77]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by sceptre.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E26109D68A; Wed, 5 Dec 2007 21:15:21 -0500 (EST) User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Shawn Bohrer writes: > Before the rewrite in C git clean would refuse to remove a directory if > you said: > > git clean dir > > without using the -d parameter. Per your suggestion this check causes > git clean to remove the directory anyway since you explicitly asked it > to. Thanks for reminding me of that issue.