On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 01:12:14PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes: > > > On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 12:12:58PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > ... > >> collapses two (or more) paths if we go that way. We only need to > >> report "we tried to check out X but it seems your filesystem equates > >> something else that is also in the project to X". > > > > Heh. See my similar suggestion in: > > > > https://public-inbox.org/git/20180728095659.GA21450@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ > > > > and the response from Duy. > > Yes, but is there a reason why we need to report what that > "something else" is? I don't think it's strictly necessary, but it probably makes things easier for the user. That said... > Presumably we are already in an error codepath, so if it is > absolutely necessary, then we can issue a lstat() to grab the inum > for the path we are about to create, iterate over the previously > checked out paths issuing lstat() and see which one yields the same > inum, to find the one who is the culprit. Yes, this is the cleverness I was missing in my earlier response. So it seems do-able, and I like that this incurs no cost in the non-error case. -Peff
