Eric Sunshine <sunshine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> get_worktrees() retrieves a list of all worktrees associated with a
> repository, including the main worktree. The location of the main
> worktree is determined by get_main_worktree() which needs to handle
> three distinct cases for the main worktree after absolute-path
> conversion:
>
> * <bare-repository>/.
> * <main-worktree>/.git/. (when $CWD is .git)
> * <main-worktree>/.git (when $CWD is any worktree)
It is unclear from the above but I would assume that you are talking
about the returned path from get_git_common_dir().
I can certainly understand why there needs two distinct cases
(i.e.. bare vs non-bare), but why is this codepath (or any caller of
get_git_common_dir()) forced to care about the two cases?
I wonder if the right "fix" to this instance, at the same time
preventing similar breakages in the future, is rather make sure
get_git_common_dir() not to return the redundant path with ".git/."
suffixed? For that matter, I do not know why the bare case must
need "/." suffix. There seem to be about a dozen callers of the
function, but don't some of them share a similar issue?
Let's look at the other two grep hits from worktree.c
strbuf_reset(&path);
strbuf_addf(&path, "%s/worktrees/%s/HEAD", get_git_common_dir(), id);
worktree = xcalloc(1, sizeof(*worktree));
worktree->path = strbuf_detach(&worktree_path, NULL);
worktree->id = xstrdup(id);
add_head_info(worktree);
done:
strbuf_release(&path);
strbuf_release(&worktree_path);
return worktree;
}
This looks somewhat bogus. "sturct strbuf path" is populated, but
is released without ever getting used, isn't it? Am I grossly
misreading the code?
The other one
strbuf_addf(&path, "%s/worktrees", get_git_common_dir());
dir = opendir(path.buf);
strbuf_release(&path);
if (dir) {
while ((d = readdir(dir)) != NULL) {
...
is a regular filesystem access, but it ends up opening the directory
with a path like "foo/.git/./worktrees", where we should be using a
more reasonable "foo/.git/worktrees" to access it. The redundant
"/./" is not wrong per-se, but it looks sloppy to depend on "not
wrong per-se".
Puzzled.
