[PATCH] addremove: print relative paths when called with -I/-X

[Martin von Zweigbergk]

On Wed Dec 03 2014 at 9:11:19 PM Matt Harbison <matt_harbison at yahoo.com>
wrote:

> On Tue, 02 Dec 2014 07:02:29 +0000, Martin von Zweigbergk wrote:
>
> > mpm, I see you have a lot of patches in flight. If you agree with this
> > patch, you may want to pick it before the other Matt's patches, and
> instead
> > make the poor guy send a V3.
> >
> > Matt, I didn't look past the first 6 or so patches. Did the anyfiles()
> > method end up being used anywhere else, or would this patch remove the
> need
> > for it completely?
> >
> > On Mon Dec 01 2014 at 9:56:26 PM Martin von Zweigbergk <
> > martinvonz at google.com> wrote:
> >
> >> # HG changeset patch
> >> # User Martin von Zweigbergk <martinvonz at google.com>
> >> # Date 1417499312 28800
> >> #      Mon Dec 01 21:48:32 2014 -0800
> >> # Node ID 0ec94796e8c2d5c142976edb49c911a92341b109
> >> # Parent  19ebd2f88fc77282efe724b30de8750f79771e8f
> >> addremove: print relative paths when called with -I/-X
> >>
>
> So I rebased my V2 series on top of this, and it changed the tests on me.
> Specifically the test I tried was basically:
>
>         $ hg init repo
>         $ mkdir repo/dir
>         <create various files>
>         $ cd repo/dir
>         $ hg addremove ..
>
> This prints out absolute files instead of relative, unlike before.  I put
> some prints in match, and what happens (in my real test) is '..' gets
> normalized to:
>
>         [('relpath', '.hglf')]"
>
> match._anypats() doesn't consider 'relpath' to be a pattern, so it returns
> None, and match.anypats() therefore returns False.  Maybe it should be OR'd
> with the fact that the pattern parameter is not empty?  I didn't run the
> tests to see if that breaks anything.  (I'm not sure why it didn't also
> list the directory I was in as a relpath too.)
>

Without having spent much thought to it, does 'not m.always()' work better?
I ask because that's what it seemed like status and locate wanted when I
checked. It's just mostly the same for addremove since exact() was already
discounted.


>
> We should probably figure this out and get it squared away before applying
> this change to status, annotate et al, and before I resubmit my series with
> bad tests.
>
> --Matt
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mercurial-devel mailing list
> Mercurial-devel at selenic.com
> http://selenic.com/mailman/listinfo/mercurial-devel
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://selenic.com/pipermail/mercurial-devel/attachments/20141204/f55d0975/attachment.html>