From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS3215 2.6.0.0/16 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.6 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE,URIBL_CSS,URIBL_CSS_A shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from out1.vger.email (out1.vger.email [IPv6:2620:137:e000::1:20]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id B34CF1F727 for ; Fri, 1 Jul 2022 19:18:30 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: dcvr.yhbt.net; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="qFPTFpGI"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231442AbiGATPQ (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Jul 2022 15:15:16 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:59122 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230180AbiGATPP (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Jul 2022 15:15:15 -0400 Received: from mail-ej1-x62a.google.com (mail-ej1-x62a.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::62a]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 838E22B244 for ; Fri, 1 Jul 2022 12:15:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ej1-x62a.google.com with SMTP id u12so5658193eja.8 for ; Fri, 01 Jul 2022 12:15:14 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=4bpUHBJi1HIOPU4wNikvqBsSMZpy3osWFqlOVBNYvXA=; b=qFPTFpGIXz4G8uvZqI83Pgc7/OnhMU6LP9P2shml0MkOjCNjanA1EHuVId5KMz68Nq L/YMqpm/0WV5LEbf1mI75A88gJ9Ft4DxG2WvbQTGMDPawH42E8QjcKMVvnvqU6wH2tyY EG31YQ8BHvSe0dX3RYu+gX2nmxU3/gWG82aFOd/FBJZOWvJ96zZDc1CZrJXUjNSR7uOx 1PCkNQ+OJvreoUuInAXFv0alKLyFGS/AZYWFtUsoFJls2xe4JSLY18/wFrYY5N8QRzvi YqkH/PaV+wtqOUYbfQJHgcHRNDnEn3VY0K6xUGqoBa8kyclr+m0ZhmZ0sd+iqkcCBK91 //4Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=4bpUHBJi1HIOPU4wNikvqBsSMZpy3osWFqlOVBNYvXA=; b=mnxZVlojB7GNoJF/xOIV5P0+ozF+mLdjtzUJ4fpehu6c5u6rU5TZEj+0zWURo7GScH GuueSPtPqT5bU+smauVYpVWB5L6FywXWXP6LCorekZSD8h1tMDgPGGoV3katTvNeMjQN bjIP7SRSfRzK0oJ+vGIj0XKEHDgHAR4C4d6tbvCRMBFlpZSTz5JDVlhy1Opvqvu7/FFZ w7aERuttMWhxaWlum61yeqB6JP1icJ5eftxMi3QU9WtpBAEU/scMURJkR1V3DE4vsE+L joHFSLppvLv9/m71+dh1J9toUDyN1C7IxxrXE5APeQRNK67Cgc2t+6kdZo2LtNpDUoKy xhwg== X-Gm-Message-State: AJIora+Qo6lCuV9jbO9KQDQF1w1kz6ugAlddfs4T6tFB6zUyh/JBAswn mRnJ/JS4cqX1+/n+UB0Jp24Wi98ko9MbtdzOUhE= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGRyM1tESbVoQExpKwqMn7dg4haUEdkF3ZMLCkynWKy1rvAON15ox/hg2298ymaGh2LdUy0lYuqLjblKQIn+mZTJIGw= X-Received: by 2002:a17:907:d29:b0:726:9e67:df9 with SMTP id gn41-20020a1709070d2900b007269e670df9mr15967077ejc.242.1656702913114; Fri, 01 Jul 2022 12:15:13 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <16832f8a-c582-23bb-dda9-b7b2597a42eb@jeffhostetler.com> In-Reply-To: From: Eric D Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2022 15:15:02 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Option to allow fsmonitor to run against repos on network file systems To: Junio C Hamano Cc: Jeff Hostetler , git@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org One more possibility: Leave the check, but make it a warning if there are still concerns about running fsmonitor against network file systems. Maybe also provide an option to suppress the warning? Not that much different from having "fsmonitor.allowRemote" I suppose other than by default fsmonitor would "just work" for network mounts. On Fri, Jul 1, 2022 at 2:41 PM Junio C Hamano wrote: > > Jeff Hostetler writes: > > > Having said all of that, I did do lots of testing and never had an > > issue with remote drives actually working correctly, so I think it'd > > be fine allow a config setting to optionally allow it. I just didn't > > want to clutter up things in advance if no one actually wanted to > > use it on remote file systems. > > > > I think it would be fine to have a "fsmonitor.allowRemote" or > > "fsmonitor.allowWindowsRemote" config setting and default them to false > > for now. Or until we learn which combinations of remote mounts are > > safe and/or problematic. > > How about getting rid of "is this remote?" check altogether (which > presumably would simplify the logic) and make it totally up to the > user of the repository? fsmonitor.disableInRepository that is set > in ~/.gitignore and lists the paths to the repositories (like > safe.directory does), for which fsmonitor gets disabled, may be a > handy mechanism to set up the default (and it can be re-enabled with > per-repository core.fsmonitor). > >