Re: Schrödinger's diff

On Mon, 6 Jul 2009, Eric Raible wrote:

git version 1.6.3.2.1299.gee46c (msysgit)

In trying to track down some annoying crlf corruption in a repo
I have found a Schrödinger's diff.  In other words it's unknown
whether the diff will produce output or not on any particular run
of the following script.

Sometimes it does, and sometimes it doesn't (seems to be about
50/50).  But either way in any given repo rerunning the git-diff will
always give the same result.

Doing an "git ls-tree HEAD" gives an identical tree in both cases.

Can anyone explain why the output to this is not deterministic?
I'm at a complete loss.

	# Clean up from last run and start over
	rm -rf .git has-crlf
	git init
	git config core.autocrlf false

	# Add a "bad" file
	perl -e 'printf( "12%c%c", 0xd, 0xa )' > has-crlf
	git add has-crlf

If has-crlf and .git/index have the same timestamp, git does not know 
whether the file has been modified afterwards or not. If they have 
different timestamps, git knows the file hasn't been modified after the 
add. (More precisely, the index contains the mtime of the file, and it 
will agree with the file system. However, if the timestamp on the index 
matches a timestamp *in* the index, that means that, when the index was 
written, the time period represented by that timestamp was not yet over 
when git looked at the file. Therefore, the file could have changed 
again after that time and still gotten the same timestamp it already had. 
This means that git can't be sure that there's nothing new to see in the 
filesystem.)

	git commit -m"add crlf"

	# I realize that switching is ill-advised, but I'm
	# trying to track down a possibly related problem...
	git config core.autocrlf true

	# This sometimes produces output and sometimes it doesn't.
	# Either way rerunning just git-diff always gives the same result
	# as the first run in this repo.
	git diff

If git knows the file hasn't been modified, it doesn't produce a diff. 

If it doesn't know the file hasn't been modified, it looks at the actual 
contents and it find that the result of reading the disk applying autocrlf 
now doesn't match the contents of the index.

	-Daniel
*This .sig left intentionally blank*