On Saturday 03 March 2007 01:12, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Junio C Hamano <junkio@xxxxxxx> writes:
> > This code (I am the guilty one before your change above) always
> > confused me. How about doing something like this instead?
> >
> > static inline unsigned int ce_mode_from_stat(struct cache_entry
> > *ce,... {
> > /*
> > * A regular file that appears on the filesystem can have
> > * a "wrong" st_mode information. A few repository config
> > * variables can tell us to trust the mode recorded in the
> > * index more than what we get from the filesystem.
> > */
> > if (ce && S_ISREG(mode)) {
> > extern int trust_executable_bit, has_symlinks;
> >
> > if (!has_symlinks && S_ISLNK(ntohl(ce->ce_mode)))
> > return ce->ce_mode;
>
> Oops, these three lines
>
> > if (!trust_executable_bit && S_ISREG(ntohl(ce->ce_mode)))
> > return ce->ce_mode;
> > return create_ce_mode(0666);
>
> should be:
>
> if (!trust...) {
> if (S_ISREG(...))
> return ce->ce_mode;
> return create_ce_mode(0666);
> }
I think that's still not correct. Because in the case of !trust_executable_bit
we want create_ce_mode(0666) regardless of whether a ce exists or not. Maybe
this way:
static inline unsigned int ce_mode_from_stat(struct cache_entry *ce,...
{
/*
* A regular file that appears on the filesystem can have
* a "wrong" st_mode information. A few repository config
* variables can tell us to trust the mode recorded in the
* index more than what we get from the filesystem.
*/
if (S_ISREG(mode)) {
extern int trust_executable_bit, has_symlinks;
if (!has_symlinks && ce && S_ISLNK(ntohl(ce->ce_mode)))
return ce->ce_mode;
if (!trust_executable_bit) {
if (ce && S_ISREG(ntohl(ce->ce_mode)))
return ce->ce_mode;
return create_ce_mode(0666);
}
}
return create_ce_mode(mode);
}
-- Hannes
-
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