> -----Original Message----- > From: Ben Peart [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2017 4:45 PM > To: David Turner <[email protected]>; 'Ben Peart' > <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; > [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; > [email protected] > Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 06/12] ls-files: Add support in ls-files to display the > fsmonitor valid bit > > > > On 9/19/2017 3:46 PM, David Turner wrote: > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Ben Peart [mailto:[email protected]] > >> Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2017 3:28 PM > >> To: [email protected] > >> Cc: David Turner <[email protected]>; [email protected]; > >> [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; > >> [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] > >> Subject: [PATCH v7 06/12] ls-files: Add support in ls-files to > >> display the fsmonitor valid bit > >> > >> Add a new command line option (-f) to ls-files to have it use > >> lowercase letters for 'fsmonitor valid' files > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Ben Peart <[email protected]> > >> --- > >> builtin/ls-files.c | 8 ++++++-- > >> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > This is still missing the corresponding documentation patch. > > Sorry for the confusion.
Thanks for following up. > > 10/12 (no reply, haven't checked whether same issue but I assume same > > issue since the new case I mentioned isn't added) > > It wasn't a bug so I didn't "fix" it. I just sent an explanation and patch > demonstrating why. You can find it here: I was concerned about the case of an untracked file inside a directory that contains no tracked files. Your patch in this mail treats dir3 just like dir1 and dir2. I think you ought to test the case of a dir with no tracked files. After more careful checking, it looks like this case does work, but it's still worth testing.
