On December 18, 2021 2:01 PM: Sean Allred wrote: > On Sat, Dec 18, 2021 at 11:47 AM <rsbecker@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On December 18, 2021 11:47 AM, Sean Allred wrote: > > > Hi folks! See the following bug report. Let me know if anything is > > > unclear -- in all honesty, I neglectfully `git worktree remove > > > --force`'d the first one I wrote... > > > > > > Thank you for filling out a Git bug report! > > > Please answer the following questions to help us understand your issue. > > > > > > What did you do before the bug happened? (Steps to reproduce your > > > issue) > > > > > > ~$ git clone --bare https://github.com/git/git.git > > > ---clip--- > > > > > > ~/gitbare$ git config --list --show-origin > > > file:config core.repositoryformatversion=1 > > > file:config core.filemode=false > > > file:config core.bare=true > > > file:config core.ignorecase=true > > > file:config remote.origin.url=https://github.com/git/git.git > > > > > > ~/gitbare$ git worktree add --no-checkout ../next > > > Preparing worktree (checking out 'next') > > > > > > ~/gitbare$ git config --list --show-origin > > > file:config core.repositoryformatversion=1 > > > file:config core.filemode=false > > > file:config core.bare=true > > > file:config core.ignorecase=true > > > file:config remote.origin.url=https://github.com/git/git.git > > > > > > ~/gitbare$ cd ../next/ > > > > > > ~/next$ git config --list --show-origin > > > file:../gitbare/config core.repositoryformatversion=1 > > > file:../gitbare/config core.filemode=false > > > file:../gitbare/config core.bare=true > > > file:../gitbare/config core.ignorecase=true > > > file:../gitbare/config remote.origin.url=https://github.com/git/git.git > > > > > > ~/next$ git rev-parse --is-bare-repository > > > false > > > > > > ~/next$ git config extensions.worktreeconfig true > > > ~/next$ git rev-parse --is-bare-repository > > > true > > > > > > ~/next$ git config --unset extensions.worktreeconfig > > > ~/next$ git rev-parse --is-bare-repository > > > false > > > > > > I actually found this situation (and narrowed it to the above) by > > > trying to perform a sparse-checkout in the worktree. It appears > > > sparse-checkout by default uses a worktree-specific config (which does > make sense). > > > > > > What did you expect to happen? (Expected behavior) > > > > > > I expected one of the following to happen: > > > > > > 1. I should have been blocked from creating a worktree from a bare > > > repository. > > > > > > 2. is_bare_repository() shouldn't be fooled by this situation, > > > assuming it's valid. > > > > > > All things being equal, I would more expect to have been blocked > > > from creating a worktree from a bare repository. Personally, this > > > bare repo + worktree setup doesn't not align with my experience so > > > far with how bare repos are normally used (i.e., as a convenience > > > for centralized remotes that will never be doing a checkout). > > > > > > What happened instead? (Actual behavior) > > > > > > is_bare_repository() is fooled and I'm prevented from performing > > > any operation that requires a worktree (like performing a sparse > > > checkout). > > > > > > What's different between what you expected and what actually > happened? > > > > > > is_bare_repository() is fooled into thinking the worktree is not a > > > worktree / I'm able to create a worktree from a bare repo. > > > > > > Anything else you want to add: > > > > > > Please review the rest of the bug report below. > > > You can delete any lines you don't wish to share. > > > > > > > > > [System Info] > > > git version: > > > git version 2.34.1 > > > cpu: x86_64 > > > no commit associated with this build > > > sizeof-long: 8 > > > sizeof-size_t: 8 > > > shell-path: /bin/sh > > > uname: Linux 5.4.72-microsoft-standard-WSL2 #1 SMP Wed Oct 28 > > > 23:40:43 UTC 2020 x86_64 compiler info: gnuc: 9.3 libc info: glibc: > > > 2.31 $SHELL (typically, interactive shell): /bin/bash > > > > > > > > > [Enabled Hooks] > > > not run from a git repository - no hooks to show > > > > My thoughts: > > > > 1. I think it is legitimate to create a worktree from a bare repository. The > worktree is using its own working directory/index and does not require > anything from the bare repo. > > 2. You ran is_bare_repository from next, which was in your worktree - not > a bare repo, so that answer actually makes sense. > I'm not sure I follow. I did run is_bare_repository from the next-worktree, > but the return value was evidently dependent on the value of > extensions.worktreeconfig. When true, is_bare_repository returned true -- > even within the next-worktree. Unless I'm missing something fairly > fundamental here... I agree that this interpretation *may* be incorrect. Worktreeconfig allows a configuration associated with worktrees but does not mean that there is one. It seems like worktreeconfig=true is causing git to check the worktree-specific configuration, finds out that you are in a worktree but there is in fact no worktree configuration specified, so the main repo is checked, which is bare, so reports true. When worktreeconfig=false, it looks like a quick decision is made that because you are in a worktree, obviously you are not bare (this may be an incorrect interpretation). I can somewhat see both sides of this. Perhaps some clarification on the interpretation is required. It does seem like is_bare_repository_cfg is false in is_bare_repository, which seems to be wrong in context. However, there is a strange comparison in worktree.c that bothers me - is_bare_repository_cfg == 1 around line 67 which is a numeric comparison to a boolean. I think that may be incorrect. There is a NEEDSWORK comment in the code immediately before that line. Hoping someone else can chime in on this. > > I'm not sure whether this is an expected use case but it does make sense > > to be one. If you typically work in worktrees and write scripts under that > > assumption, not having to worry about being in the non-worktree part of a > > clone makes sense. So creating a worktree off a bare repo is not a bad thing, > > assuming everything else is correct. The essential part of create a worktree from a bare repo still makes sense to me.
