"Shawn O. Pearce" <spearce@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > static int lock_file(struct lock_file *lk, const char *path)
> > {
> > int fd;
> > + struct stat st;
> > +
> > + if ((!lstat(path, &st)) && S_ISLNK(st.st_mode)) {
> > + ssize_t sz;
> > + static char target[PATH_MAX];
> > + sz = readlink(path, target, sizeof(target));
> > + if (sz < 0)
> > + warning("Cannot readlink %s", path);
> > + else
> > + path = target;
> > + }
> > sprintf(lk->filename, "%s.lock", path);
> > fd = open(lk->filename, O_RDWR | O_CREAT | O_EXCL, 0666);
> > if (0 <= fd) {
>
> Right. But don't you have to resolve target relative to path?
> If the symlink is an absolute path its fine as-is, but if it was
> relative its relative to path, not pwd.
It might just be OK to refuse to lock a symlink that isn't absolute.
git-new-workdir already uses absolute paths to setup the symlinks.
--
Shawn.
-
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
