From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: david@lang.hm Subject: Re: Not going beyond symbolic links Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2008 20:04:31 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: References: <20080721002354.GK10151@machine.or.cz> <20080721002508.26773.92277.stgit@localhost> <7v8wvpm9cl.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> <7vej5543v5.fsf_-_@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> <7v8wvc2seh.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> <7v3alk17yh.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Cc: Linus Torvalds , git@vger.kernel.org, Petr Baudis , "Shawn O. Pearce" , Johannes Schindelin To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Aug 05 05:06:19 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1KQCrz-0001Xx-II for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Tue, 05 Aug 2008 05:05:55 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1763179AbYHEDEd (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Aug 2008 23:04:33 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1763022AbYHEDE3 (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Aug 2008 23:04:29 -0400 Received: from mail.lang.hm ([64.81.33.126]:53041 "EHLO bifrost.lang.hm" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1762975AbYHEDE0 (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Aug 2008 23:04:26 -0400 Received: from asgard.lang.hm (asgard.lang.hm [10.0.0.100]) by bifrost.lang.hm (8.13.4/8.13.4/Debian-3) with ESMTP id m7533dDw005948; Mon, 4 Aug 2008 20:03:39 -0700 X-X-Sender: dlang@asgard.lang.hm In-Reply-To: <7v3alk17yh.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> User-Agent: Alpine 1.10 (DEB 962 2008-03-14) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Mon, 4 Aug 2008, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Linus Torvalds writes: > >> ... Because this is definitely not a black-and-white "one behavior is >> wrong and one behavior is right". > > I wish I could agree with you that this is a feature, but 16a4c61 > (read-tree -m -u: avoid getting confused by intermediate symlinks., > 2007-05-10) and 64cab59 (apply: do not get confused by symlinks in the > middle, 2007-05-11) came from real world breakage cases and the root cause > was that we were too lenient to allow such a "feature" that pretends the > symlink not to be there. > > Right now, we are being careful only while branch switching and patch > application, but the codepaths that add directly to the index (add and > update-index) are not fixed (or "still has the feature"). > > I do not see a clean way to keep such a "feature" without hurting users > who suffered the bugs these two commits from May 2007 fixed. config option? I think a command line is too much work for too little value, but if the check could be ignored based on a config option without costing too much it may be reasonable. David Lang