On Sat, Jul 14, 2018 at 12:35:05AM +0000, brian m. carlson wrote: > diff --git a/sequencer.c b/sequencer.c > index 5354d4d51e..c8e16f9168 100644 > --- a/sequencer.c > +++ b/sequencer.c > @@ -2636,6 +2636,8 @@ static int do_exec(const char *command_line) > fprintf(stderr, "Executing: %s\n", command_line); > child_argv[0] = command_line; > argv_array_pushf(&child_env, "GIT_DIR=%s", absolute_path(get_git_dir())); > + argv_array_pushf(&child_env, "GIT_WORK_TREE=%s", > + absolute_path(get_git_work_tree())); > status = run_command_v_opt_cd_env(child_argv, RUN_USING_SHELL, NULL, > child_env.argv); > As a general rule of "always pass GIT_WORK_TREE with GIT_DIR", you have to deal with the case where there _isn't_ a work tree. Are we OK here because this code is inside sequencer.c, and you cannot do a sequencer operation without a work tree? This all seemed vaguely familiar, so I dug up 2cd83d10bb (setup: suppress implicit "." work-tree for bare repos, 2013-03-08), which handles a similar case in the alias code. So I think it would also work to set: GIT_IMPLICIT_WORK_TREE=0 here. But if the answer to my "are we OK" above is yes, I am fine with either that solution or the one you show here (but I think the commit message should probably mention it). > diff --git a/t/t3404-rebase-interactive.sh b/t/t3404-rebase-interactive.sh > index 352a52e59d..d03055d149 100755 > --- a/t/t3404-rebase-interactive.sh > +++ b/t/t3404-rebase-interactive.sh > @@ -119,6 +119,15 @@ test_expect_success 'rebase -i with exec allows git commands in subdirs' ' > ) > ' > > +test_expect_success 'rebase -i sets work tree properly' ' > + test_when_finished "rm -rf subdir" && > + test_when_finished "test_might_fail git rebase --abort" && > + mkdir subdir && > + git rebase -x "(cd subdir && git rev-parse --show-toplevel)" HEAD^ \ > + >actual && > + ! grep "/subdir$" actual > +' This test looks good to me. -Peff
