Phillip Wood <phillip.wood123@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > Thanks for picking this up, I think this looks like a good approach > apart from resolving relative entries in safe.directory which is > intrinsically unsafe as we don't know which directory the user wants > to consider safe. With these changes it should not be necessary to add > "." to safe.directory to get "git daemon" to work and all the other > code paths use an absolute path from getcwd() so I don't think there > is any need to support relative directories. I agree that we could limit to absolute, but that would mean we would be breaking a configuration that used to work. I do not want to mix that into this topic. > I'll be off the list for the next couple of weeks I'd imagine it would be for a block of fun time? Enjoy. In any case, this topic won't be moving in the coming few weeks anyway ;-)
