Detection of clean repo is not reliable. about transcrypt HOT 10 CLOSED

Hmm, is there any reason we shouldn't apply the naïve but simple "fix" and always run git update-index -q --really-refresh or git status before checking for a clean repository?

It would be weird voodoo, but should at least solve the problem.

from transcrypt.

for example, have a look at how the git bash prompt detects dirty state
https://github.com/git/git/blob/e31aba42fb12bdeb0f850829e008e1e3f43af500/contrib/completion/git-prompt.sh#L527-L528

from transcrypt.

I wonder if there is some stale stat info from whatever codefresh is doing. Instead of running git status, if you touch all of the encrypted files, does the clean check work as expected?

cd $(git rev-parse --show-toplevel)
touch $(git ls-crypt)

from transcrypt.

I've experienced the same thing using CircleCI. I solved it by doing a git reset --hard HEAD even though when I'd ssh'ed in, git status returned nothing to commit, working directory clean

from transcrypt.

Hate to do a +1, but I'm now experiencing this when running WSL on Windows on Github Actions.

LATER EDIT
It is just mesmerizing how running git status before decrypting can workaround the situation 🤔

• no git status
• git status

Explanations:

• https://stackoverflow.com/questions/34807971/why-does-git-diff-index-head-result-change-for-touched-files-after-git-diff-or-g
• https://public-inbox.org/git/[email protected]/T/#u

LATER LATER EDIT
As per SO, I used git update-index -q --really-refresh instead of git status, etc.

from transcrypt.

It's not really voodoo :) after you read the tiny details, that is.... sigh it's just that diff-index gives you a probabilistic view of the world, not a binary one that's all. So if we want to stick to diff-index, then we need update-index. Otherwise we can use a higher-level git command like git status that gives you a binary answer.

from transcrypt.

Hi @andreineculau it's been a while sorry, but I have created a pull request with a potential fix to more reliably detect dirty repositories, without false positives. It would be great if you could look over it or test it: #109

from transcrypt.

Well, I have already implemented this in ysoftwareab/yplatform@4834b27 (basically just for my usecase of WSL in CI) and it does work. I'd be surprised if your fix gives degraded outcome.

I'm currently not able to test this, but it's a +1 from me.

from transcrypt.

Hi @mrmachine @dfee and anyone else watching this issue, could someone test and confirm the potential fix for detection of dirty repos in pull request #109?

from transcrypt.

With the merge of #109 this issue should now be fixed. Please re-open if dirty repo detection is still failing for you when using the latest transcrypt from the master branch.

from transcrypt.