Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> writes: > Sorry, but I am confused by all of the above. > > We write the thing out with write_entry(), possibly applying smudge > filters and eol conversion to the "git" representation to create the > "working tree" representation in this codepath, right? The resulting > file matches what the user's configuration told us to produce. > > Until the working tree file is changed by somebody after the above > happens, we shouldn't have to check the contents of the file to see > if there is a difference. By definition, that has to match the > contents expected to be there by Git. > > The only case I can think of that the above does not hold is when > the smuge/clean and the eol conversion are not a correct round-trip > operation pairs, but that would be a misconfiguration. Otherwise, > we'd be _always_ comparing the contents without relying on the > cached stat info for any paths whose in-core and working tree > representations are different, not just those that are configured > with misbehaving smudge/clean pair, no?
To put it differently, if a blob stored at path has CRLF line endings and .gitattributes is changed after the fact to say that it must have LF line endings, we should treat it as a broken transitory state. There may have to be a way to "fix" an already "wrong" blob in the index that is milder than "rm --cached && add .", but I do not think write_entry(), which is shared by all the normal codepaths that writes out to the working tree, is the best place to do so, if doing so forces the contents of the paths to be always re-checked, just in case the user is in such a broken transitory state. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
