On Sat, May 8, 2021 at 3:13 AM Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > "Elijah Newren via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > From: Elijah Newren <newren@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > PNPM is apparently creating deeply nested (but ignored) directory > > Sorry, but what's PNPM? a package manager; I'll use Philip Oakley's suggestion to make it more clear. > > structures; traversing them is costly performance-wise, unnecessary, and > > in some cases is even throwing warnings/errors because the paths are too > > long to handle on various platforms. Add a testcase that demonstrates > > this problem. > > > > Initial-test-by: Jason Gore <Jason.Gore@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Helped-by: brian m. carlson <sandals@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@xxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > t/t7300-clean.sh | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > 1 file changed, 40 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/t/t7300-clean.sh b/t/t7300-clean.sh > > index a74816ca8b46..5f1dc397c11e 100755 > > --- a/t/t7300-clean.sh > > +++ b/t/t7300-clean.sh > > @@ -746,4 +746,44 @@ test_expect_success 'clean untracked paths by pathspec' ' > > test_must_be_empty actual > > ' > > > > +test_expect_failure 'avoid traversing into ignored directories' ' > > + test_when_finished rm -f output error && > > + test_create_repo avoid-traversing-deep-hierarchy && > > + ( > > + cd avoid-traversing-deep-hierarchy && > > + > > + >directory-random-file.txt && > > + # Put this file under directory400/directory399/.../directory1/ > > + depth=400 && > > + for x in $(test_seq 1 $depth); do > > Style. Lose semicolon, have "do" on the next line on its own, > aligned with "for". Tip: you shouldn't need any semicolon other > than the doubled ones in case/esac in your shell script. Thanks. > > > + mkdir "tmpdirectory$x" && > > + mv directory* "tmpdirectory$x" && > > + mv "tmpdirectory$x" "directory$x" > > + done && > > + > > + git clean -ffdxn -e directory$depth >../output 2>../error && > > + > > + test_must_be_empty ../output && > > + # We especially do not want things like > > + # "warning: could not open directory " > > + # appearing in the error output. It is true that directories > > + # that are too long cannot be opened, but we should not be > > + # recursing into those directories anyway since the very first > > + # level is ignored. > > + test_must_be_empty ../error && > > + > > + # alpine-linux-musl fails to "rm -rf" a directory with such > > + # a deeply nested hierarchy. Help it out by deleting the > > + # leading directories ourselves. Super slow, but, what else > > + # can we do? Without this, we will hit a > > + # error: Tests passed but test cleanup failed; aborting > > + # so do this ugly manual cleanup... > > + while test ! -f directory-random-file.txt; do > > Ditto. Yep, sorry. > > + name=$(ls -d directory*) && > > + mv $name/* . && > > + rmdir $name > > + done > > Hmph, after seeing the discussion thread of v1, I was expecting to > see a helper in Perl that cd's down and then comes back up while > removing what is in its directory (and I expected something similar > for creation side we saw above). Hmm, I was a bit unsure of the alternative route I took in patches 7 and 8 (switching trace1 to trace2 in dir.c, then using it to get more statistics which would allow a much more shallow directory structure for this test). I wasn't sure if the strategy seemed acceptable, and I wanted people to be able to see the two schemes side-by-side, but if that alternative is acceptable, I want to move patch 7 to the front of the series, the code change parts of patch 8 as the second patch, and then squash the rest of patch 8 into this patch vastly simplifying this testcase and obsoleting everyone's comments on it. Maybe I should have just refactored the series that way anyway. I'll send a reroll that does that, and put all the [RFC] patches first.
