On Fri, Dec 29, 2017 at 2:10 AM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > >>> [1] https://public-inbox.org/git/CACsJy8AmbKSp0mDLRaDCWn45veeNc03B-Gq8r8PQPrDt9bM_EA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ >>> >>> dir.c | 2 +- >>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/dir.c b/dir.c >>> index 7c4b45e30e..edcb7bb462 100644 >>> --- a/dir.c >>> +++ b/dir.c >>> @@ -1809,7 +1809,7 @@ static int valid_cached_dir(struct dir_struct *dir, >>> */ >>> refresh_fsmonitor(istate); >>> if (!(dir->untracked->use_fsmonitor && untracked->valid)) { >>> - if (stat(path->len ? path->buf : ".", &st)) { >>> + if (lstat(path->len ? path->buf : ".", &st)) { > > Hmph, I have to wonder if this is sufficient, though. When you got > "a/b/c" in path->buf, is it sufficient to avoid mistaking 'c' that > is (eh, rather, "has unexpectedly turned into") a symbolic link to a > directory as a true directory? Wouldn't we have to be equally careful > about "a" and "a/b" as well? We do. But the way directory traversal works, I believe a and a/b must have been checked (by this function too) before we call valid_cached_dir("a/b/c"). -- Duy
