[Gnu-arch-users] [BUG] Re: [...] (tree root id?)

[Tom Lord]

    > From: Miles Bader <address@hidden>

    > On Mon, Apr 05, 2004 at 01:46:20PM -0400, Aaron Bentley wrote:
    > > >Okay, so I understand that arch does not currently look at the 
tree-root 
    > > >at all.  I will argue though that it should, as well as looking at 
parent 
    > > >directory id's.

    > > That would mean you could never rename the tree root.  This is 
    > > unacceptable for me.  I keep several copies of tla around in my home 
    > > directory, each with a different name.

    > That's not how I interpreted what Ben said.

    > I though he was saying that arch should keep (or allow) an _id_ for the 
root,
    > and use that in renaming files within it.

    > E.g., to make a subdir `root', one might do:

    >    cd root
    >    mv subdir/* .
    >    tla move-id subdir .
    >    # [Or, if move-id doesn't work for some reason:
    >    #    tla add --id `tla id subdir` .
    >    # ]
    >    rm -rf subdir

    > Caveat: I have no idea how arch actually does the diff calculations for 
this
    > sort of thing.  One question comes to mind: what on earth happens to the
    > files _already_ present in the root when you do the above...?

It's legit -- insightful even -- to say that arch should but does not
allow . to be tagged.

It's a _fairly_ obsucre case but a completely reasonable request that
can be satisfied upward compatibly (hence, the [BUG] in the subject).


-t