From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.1 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,BODY_URI_ONLY, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id D356D2070D for ; Fri, 8 Jul 2016 17:14:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932185AbcGHROb (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Jul 2016 13:14:31 -0400 Received: from mout.web.de ([212.227.17.12]:57477 "EHLO mout.web.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755307AbcGHROa (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Jul 2016 13:14:30 -0400 Received: from [192.168.209.22] ([195.252.60.88]) by smtp.web.de (mrweb102) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0Lhvlm-1bgtbY3pfG-00nCFm; Fri, 08 Jul 2016 19:14:15 +0200 Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] correct ce_compare_data() in a middle of a merge To: Junio C Hamano References: <1467100876-2803-1-git-send-email-tboegi@web.de> <62eb3d75-126e-427b-8701-d490e80e3501@web.de> <574692d1-c8ae-9c2f-6b99-a01545b15051@telia.com> <2cbf12a6-2dca-8180-323b-f79638aa03bd@web.de> Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, tboegi@web.de From: =?UTF-8?Q?Torsten_B=c3=b6gershausen?= Message-ID: Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2016 19:13:40 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/45.1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:BeAeul/V4r8TGBnPGqd/a+sR43qNJATLd+kIMscnzkpznOuYhvf LvmEQaNqrZTvRcANkESOOMZtKPFc+cnnK8WmP7AbQ47itkPD7Pc3+rKmUcND0DGLPHNYav3 ehKC2LCHWrKNJxJ9gz4+Y/0a5D5JS+gM37uOkeblxWeuwCoKdWzGC18HKHtJqnqGqKPRgkV Ii/XD/nKmJ4IDn1P98nGQ== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:V96yYjmk3fA=:0kb/oC16eZAFRsE+p+o/Yw 3QaJ+dn32iG0SnJcx/LxDte1SbHR0U001nPfb7xnbA/m9N8JNnxT/S9XMkwjlinY+t/xTIKbg HlVH784UCJWMDshJ7uP4f8ur3/HrIPAUyP/MtIez0QNrNKTXz49FaB+LXRquC6QQAVPREgtkw K2ExEw8kVUJUCX1qMRz7qs84sQNyQUtKM3gV0+p0w77W4T7Ix0R2m03Ig9/LJTcql2rvaUM2C 0HmVw9K6LhUqlIZG4poqrENU/aX5hCp5s3NGggOAgVGQqStu9sn07x+BTUga3UH3t3ur7ynjV oNPP4AXIFE3+xSUghbo7Q2cyRKaud6ZWEG6T743tAb7oCxVIwCxjiLo6fbaUAVWMM02bdyRB6 Y470C/alD1VQMXtSD1A5g5CzxRqAkDd5fo3d2uoEyRkfm2DqZcIlx9ZliJEe2mN4pf7zg9YDY v7+5IC0wkrDvJ3/X/zXD3JFuo2gjoEvFM2BLTpLa8DNj/WwodzyKn2+FoS/F6ePExMtnBP1T3 ESCmWuUplySNfZqu9rRL0Yr9Louo0EAx2H+Sxi81Nps8ySwxvZZhOoHCVyeAFCx65Bwn0lsri Bz5SAnzl/E6prJ/6MAoARswVc0XC1I50UpI6U0TpkdCJ2zZi9AyGBb5hsUh7dZrVS7hBzC5vQ 5E1Hjff4SRLg2n48ZgKjndVrQuNTmRL8ht3JyCbiRm6zSJH5LJ3zVFzWChLMitUVM4wQjeqW7 ICuJTEApIh+iIK2RjZO65pUqgXi/ysR2RKNEePsmNk+lCP9DSLzrHy1kQhKEV0wd/VfI1yZSy SHsdGQB Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On 07/08/2016 06:36 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Torsten Bögershausen writes: > >>> I dunno. I really do not like that extra sha1 argument added all >>> over the callchain by this patch. >>> >>> Or did you mean other calls to add_cacheinfo()? >> >> I didn't mean too much - the whole call chain touches code where I >> am not able to comment on details. >> I'm happy to test other implementations, if someone suggests a >> path, so to say. > > I did a bit of experiment. > > When 1/3 alone is applied, and then only changes for t/t6038 from > 3/3 is picked, (i.e. we do not add the extra "don't look at index, > check this contents"), your "Merge addition of text=auto eol=CRLF" > test would fail. > > And then with this further on top: > > diff --git a/merge-recursive.c b/merge-recursive.c > index b880ae5..628c8ed 100644 > --- a/merge-recursive.c > +++ b/merge-recursive.c > @@ -202,6 +202,9 @@ static int add_cacheinfo(unsigned int mode, const unsigned char *sha1, > const char *path, int stage, int refresh, int options) > { > struct cache_entry *ce; > + > + if (!stage) > + remove_file_from_cache(path); > ce = make_cache_entry(mode, sha1 ? sha1 : null_sha1, path, stage, > (refresh ? (CE_MATCH_REFRESH | > CE_MATCH_IGNORE_MISSING) : 0 )); > Thanks :-) Did that experiment made it to a branch somewhere ?