git show on bare repository?

git show on bare repository?

[skillzero]

I could have sworn I used to be able to use git show to display the
contents of a file from the server, but now it always says this (if I
use -- then it doesn't show anything):

fatal: ambiguous argument 'master:file.txt': unknown revision or path
not in the working tree.
Use '--' to separate paths from revisions

What I'm trying to do is allow people to get a single file without
having to clone the entirely repository, like this:

ssh git.example.com "cd /MyRepo.git && git show master:File.txt"

If I do this with a non-bare repository, it works. The server is
running git version 1.6.3.2 (I'm running 1.6.4 locally where it
works).

Re: git show on bare repository?

[Jeff King]

On Sat, Aug 01, 2009 at 08:51:45PM -0700, skillzero@gmail.com wrote:

> I could have sworn I used to be able to use git show to display the
> contents of a file from the server, but now it always says this (if I
> use -- then it doesn't show anything):

It should work fine.

> fatal: ambiguous argument 'master:file.txt': unknown revision or path
> not in the working tree.
> Use '--' to separate paths from revisions

Either you don't have a 'master' ref, or the commit there doesn't have
'file.txt'. Try "git show master" and "git show master^{tree}" to see
which.

It would be nice if the error were more descriptive ("master resolved,
but does not contain file.txt"). The vagueness is an artifact of the way
the code is structured, I think (we try a lot of different things and
then barf at the toplevel, which doesn't know any of the details of how
far we got into each possibility).

> What I'm trying to do is allow people to get a single file without
> having to clone the entirely repository, like this:
> 
> ssh git.example.com "cd /MyRepo.git && git show master:File.txt"

I don't know if this is a cut and past error, but you say "File" here
and "file" above. That could cause the error you are seeing.

> If I do this with a non-bare repository, it works. The server is
> running git version 1.6.3.2 (I'm running 1.6.4 locally where it
> works).

The bareness of the repo shouldn't matter, as the filename is coming
from the tree pointed to by 'master'. Unless it is a bug, it is probably
just that the refs are different between the two repos.

-Peff

Re: git show on bare repository?

[skillzero]

On Sat, Aug 1, 2009 at 9:44 PM, Jeff King<peff@peff.net> wrote:
> Either you don't have a 'master' ref, or the commit there doesn't have
> 'file.txt'. Try "git show master" and "git show master^{tree}" to see
> which.

It turns out the file just didn't exist because the repository is at a
slight different path.

Thanks for the help. I didn't know about the ^{tree} thing.