Matheus Tavares [off-list ref] writes:
Then, the test would become:
setup_sparse_entry &&
test-tool cached_mtime sparse_entry >before &&
test-tool chmtime -60 sparse_entry &&
git add --refresh sparse_entry &&
test-tool cached_mtime sparse_entry >after &&
test_cmp before after
What do you think?
I do not see much point in introducing a duplicated "ls-files --debug"
that gives only a subset of its output. Even if we add test-tool,
we would need to reserve the right to change its output format any time,
so I am not sure what we'd be gaining by avoiding the use of
existing one.
Thanks.