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=-6.4 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, 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 81A7520705 for ; Thu, 7 Jul 2016 21:34:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753018AbcGGVea (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Jul 2016 17:34:30 -0400 Received: from avasout05.plus.net ([84.93.230.250]:53164 "EHLO avasout05.plus.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751926AbcGGVe2 (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Jul 2016 17:34:28 -0400 Received: from hashpling.plus.com ([212.159.69.125]) by avasout05 with smtp id FxaS1t0012iA9hg01xaTp3; Thu, 07 Jul 2016 22:34:27 +0100 X-CM-Score: 0.00 X-CNFS-Analysis: v=2.2 cv=V/4/6qvi c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=wpJ/2au8Z6V/NgdivHIBow==:117 a=wpJ/2au8Z6V/NgdivHIBow==:17 a=kj9zAlcOel0A:10 a=cAmyUtKerLwA:10 a=Ew9TdX-QAAAA:8 a=APH_RvaqiIioEbBB-tgA:9 a=obabQ9O6v7JZJTLIbnk7:22 Received: from charles by hashpling.plus.com with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bLGwE-0005MT-8w; Thu, 07 Jul 2016 22:34:26 +0100 Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2016 22:34:26 +0100 From: Charles Bailey To: Junio C Hamano Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, =?utf-8?B?Tmd1eeG7hW4gVGjDoWkgTmfhu41j?= Duy Subject: Re: What's cooking in git.git (Jul 2016, #02; Wed, 6) Message-ID: <20160707213426.GA20572@hashpling.org> References: <20160707204002.GA19138@hashpling.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jul 07, 2016 at 02:21:28PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Charles Bailey writes: > > > I just wanted to clarify what was actually fixed. The actual bug that > > was reported and fixed was the fact that 'git grep' (without --cached) > > wasn't searching the contents of files in the working tree if the index > > entry had the "intent to add" bit set. > > Ouch, you are absolutely right. > > Git does not know what the contents in the index should be for a > path added with "git add -N" yet, so "git grep --cached" should not > show hits (or show lack of hits, with -L) in such a path, but that > logic does not apply to "git grep", i.e. searching in the working > tree files. But we did so by mistake, which has been corrected. > > perhaps? Yes, that reads like an accurate summary to me.