"Shak" <sshaikh@hotmail.com> wrote in message 
news:g2r1sb$tut$1@ger.gmane.org...
quoted text
> "Shak" <sshaikh@hotmail.com> wrote in message 
> news:g2r19e$s6e@ger.gmane.org...
>> Hi,
>>
>> Are files supposed to be continually tracked after commiting after 
>> deleting them?
>>
>> git status reports that files have been deleted as expected (they're not 
>> there anymore). I commit as wanted. I do some more work, but then git 
>> status still reports that the same files have been deleted. As such I 
>> have a historical list of "deleted" files that I may have been working on 
>> previously and had committed.
>>
>> I have to run git rm to erase these entries, but I've no idea how that 
>> affects my history.
>>
>> Shouldn't git add/commit remember that a file has been deleted 
>> previously?
>>
>> On a related note, once I do git rm on one of these files, git status 
>> sometimes reports that these rm'd files have been renamed to a new one 
>> instead! What's going on? :(
>
> To be clear on the last point, git seems to be incorrectly detecting that 
> I've copied (sometimes to the same directory) and renamed files. What's 
> the difference anyway? And is there anyway to override it's overzelaous 
> assumptions?
>

To rudely reply to my own message a second time, it seems I have to 
explicitly run "git add -u" to actually commit deletions before committing. 
I don't notice any changes in "git status" so there doesn't seem a way of 
knowing that it's required.

I've also noticed that renames aren't detected until you commit a delete.

This is all becoming very counter-intuitive :(

Shak 


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html