From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [BUG] git ls-files -m --with-tree does double output Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2008 14:39:46 -0800 Message-ID: <7vk5b7fdxp.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <37512.N1gUGH5fRhE=.1226613228.squirrel@webmail.hotelhot.dk> <7vod0jfe51.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: gitster@pobox.com, git@vger.kernel.org To: "Anders Melchiorsen" X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Nov 13 23:41:42 2008 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 1L0ksf-0001Rc-KV for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Thu, 13 Nov 2008 23:41:42 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752141AbYKMWk1 (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 Nov 2008 17:40:27 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752060AbYKMWk1 (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 Nov 2008 17:40:27 -0500 Received: from a-sasl-fastnet.sasl.smtp.pobox.com ([207.106.133.19]:63039 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751795AbYKMWk0 (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 Nov 2008 17:40:26 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-sasl-fastnet.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D93607D56D; Thu, 13 Nov 2008 17:40:25 -0500 (EST) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [68.225.240.211]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a-sasl-fastnet.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9F70A7D569; Thu, 13 Nov 2008 17:39:53 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <7vod0jfe51.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> (Junio C. Hamano's message of "Thu, 13 Nov 2008 14:35:22 -0800") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 107CBB84-B1D4-11DD-B795-9CEDC82D7133-77302942!a-sasl-fastnet.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Junio C Hamano writes: > What's the use case of using -m together with --with-tree to begin with? > I think the only sensible other option that makes sense with --with-tree > is --error-unmatch. The reason I ask this question is that the cleanest fix to the issue might turn out to be to forbid that combination of the options, if it turns out that it does not make any sense.