Re: [PATCH] Really update the git index to avoid false -dirty versions

[Andreas Gruenbacher]

On Monday 12 April 2010 19:38:07 Jim Meyering wrote:
> Andreas Gruenbacher wrote:
> 
> > On Monday 12 April 2010 18:25:01 Jim Meyering wrote:
> >> Can you describe a scenario in which
> >> using "git update-index --refresh" makes
> >> git-version-gen work better than with "git status"?
> >> In the example I tried (touch an unmodified, vc'd file),
> >> they appear to have the same net effect.
> >
> > I can't pinpoint it.  In some versions or configurations of git, git 
status
> > seems to be enough, but I get the following here with git 
1.7.0.2.273.gc2413:
> >
> >     $ git diff-index --name-only HEAD
> >     $ touch README
> >     $ git diff-index --name-only HEAD
> >     README
> >     $ git status > /dev/null
> >     $ git diff-index --name-only HEAD
> >     README
> >     $ git update-index --refresh
> >     $ git diff-index --name-only HEAD
> 
> Yes, that's exactly what I tried.
> Only for me (with git's "next"), they work as well.
> 
>   $ git diff-index --name-only HEAD
>   $ touch README
>   $ git diff-index --name-only HEAD
>   README
>   $ git status > /dev/null
>   $ git diff-index --name-only HEAD
>   $ git --version
>   git version 1.7.1.rc1.237.ge1730

I see ... given that "git update-index" is documented to do exactly what git-
version-gen want to do while "git status" does that only as a side effect, and 
apparently only sometimes, would it make sense to switch to "git update-
index"?

> Here's a comment from GNUmakefile:
> 
>   # Ensure that $(VERSION) is up to date for dist-related targets, but not
>   # for others: rerunning autoreconf and recompiling everything isn't cheap.

Thanks, that could be acceptable.

Andreas