Re: [RFC/PATCH 0/2] unpack-trees: handle lstat failures in verify_absent

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 08:24:15PM -0600, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
>
> Here are two cases where we ignore the result from lstat in
> unpack_trees.  I think we rather shouldn't ignore it.  Sane?

Looks good. Thanks.

But in addition to the ones you fixed, lstat errors returned by
lstat_cache_matchlen() in check_leading_path() are also ignored.
I was actually hoping to restructure this into two functions.

 1) check_path() to see if we need to overwrite anything (leading
    directory _or_ file of the same name)
 2) check_ok_to_remove() to check if we can safely overwrite that
    directory or file

All the lstat handling would go into check_path(), and
check_ok_to_remove() can reuse the stat returned by check_path().

But right now I can't say when I will find the time.

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


[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]