From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: git pull on ia64 linux tree Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 18:08:29 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: References: <20050427225821.GI22956@pasky.ji.cz> <20050428000729.GT22956@pasky.ji.cz> <20050428003342.GW22956@pasky.ji.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: "Luck, Tony" , git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Apr 28 03:01:22 2005 Return-path: Received: from vger.kernel.org ([12.107.209.244]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DQxOv-0002wC-Ar for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Thu, 28 Apr 2005 03:01:09 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262142AbVD1BGf (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 Apr 2005 21:06:35 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262143AbVD1BGf (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 Apr 2005 21:06:35 -0400 Received: from fire.osdl.org ([65.172.181.4]:457 "EHLO smtp.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262142AbVD1BGd (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 Apr 2005 21:06:33 -0400 Received: from shell0.pdx.osdl.net (fw.osdl.org [65.172.181.6]) by smtp.osdl.org (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id j3S16Us4006365 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=NO); Wed, 27 Apr 2005 18:06:30 -0700 Received: from localhost (shell0.pdx.osdl.net [10.9.0.31]) by shell0.pdx.osdl.net (8.13.1/8.11.6) with ESMTP id j3S16TZU022116; Wed, 27 Apr 2005 18:06:29 -0700 To: Petr Baudis In-Reply-To: <20050428003342.GW22956@pasky.ji.cz> X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0 required=5 tests= X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63-osdl_revision__1.35__ X-MIMEDefang-Filter: osdl$Revision: 1.109 $ X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.36 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 28 Apr 2005, Petr Baudis wrote: > > > (Which is not really nice, because it means that some files get updated > > and others don't, depending on how they were merged, but whatever..) > > We always do checkout-cache -f -a after we do merge-cache, so it should > end up in a consistent state. I agree that for the common case it doesn't really matter, since we'll always update the working directory regardless. It was more of a conceptual complaint. We do everything else purely in the index, so it's a bit confusing that in that intermediate stage _some_ files end up being up-to-date, and others end up not. Linus