Junio C Hamano schrieb: > While I think the ones that are immediately followed by > commit_locked_index() can drop the close(fd) safely, I am not > sure about Kristian's changes to the other ones that we > currently close(fd) but do not commit nor rollback immediately. > These indices are now shown to the hook with open fd to it if > you choose not to close them. Is that okay for Windows guys? I > somehow had an impression that the other process may have > trouble accessing a file that is still open elsewhere for > writing. The trouble is that on Windows open files cannot be deleted or renamed. Hence, if an index file remains open, the hooks won't be able to modify them (because of the create-new-file-then-rename-over-old tactics). > So I think the approach along the lines of your "hack" to close > and tell lockfile API not to double-close is more appropriate. > We would perhaps want "close_lock_file(struct lock_file *)" that > calls close(lk->fd) and does lk->fd = -1 without rename/unlink, > and replace these close() with that. Yes! -- Hannes - 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
