From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: Last mile for 1.0 Date: Mon, 06 Jun 2005 00:05:29 -0700 Message-ID: <7vekbgufra.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> References: <7voeak1o0q.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <7vk6l8xue5.fsf_-_@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <20050606054356.GB3669@cip.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <20050606064456.GC3669@cip.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Thomas Glanzmann , git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Jun 06 09:02:47 2005 Return-path: Received: from vger.kernel.org ([12.107.209.244]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DfBcf-00005r-1P for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Mon, 06 Jun 2005 09:02:09 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261152AbVFFHFi (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Jun 2005 03:05:38 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261190AbVFFHFi (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Jun 2005 03:05:38 -0400 Received: from fed1rmmtao06.cox.net ([68.230.241.33]:29835 "EHLO fed1rmmtao06.cox.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261152AbVFFHFb (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Jun 2005 03:05:31 -0400 Received: from assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net ([68.4.60.172]) by fed1rmmtao06.cox.net (InterMail vM.6.01.04.00 201-2131-118-20041027) with ESMTP id <20050606070529.ZNTE19494.fed1rmmtao06.cox.net@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>; Mon, 6 Jun 2005 03:05:29 -0400 To: Linus Torvalds In-Reply-To: (Linus Torvalds's message of "Sun, 5 Jun 2005 23:57:07 -0700 (PDT)") User-Agent: Gnus/5.1007 (Gnus v5.10.7) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org >>>>> "LT" == Linus Torvalds writes: LT> Not exactly. It updates the index directly, without necessarily updating LT> the working directory. For example: LT> "$1.." | "$1.$1" | "$1$1.") LT> echo "Removing $4" LT> exec git-update-cache --force-remove "$4" ;; LT> it _says_ "removing $4", but it never actually does so, so the working LT> directory still has the file ;) Yes, this was done from your explicit request not to touch the working directory while it works AFAICR. At least back then, not touching the working tree was the _requirement_. So is "the new merge world order" you mentioned in the log message now require (and assume) the work tree more-or-less matches the first head being merged?