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: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.1 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9DDE31F45A for ; Wed, 14 Aug 2019 17:56:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729083AbfHNR41 (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Aug 2019 13:56:27 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com ([173.228.157.52]:51437 "EHLO pb-smtp20.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726126AbfHNR41 (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Aug 2019 13:56:27 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 025507C1C2; Wed, 14 Aug 2019 13:56:25 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=BdtQYlZm2vKZ4eK/mAMcGxVIa+c=; b=WNAw7e QF3beYMaGa0GH5SMfEZjxOBRP5jQ5ohpQZ3GTgcZvnBXzIWyu1hJo2SKZGT/5ZxL xOWEbfRA4UKWSFUl0MVeC9kWeU45ax69pj0FzhdjI3OQ/r7LdDwsSMl68LoRzbE1 LGr091gkK82nCk7Vzihvu6/YVKEHUUWZTQSzY= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=lU3nrCRyUkV3ekOZUSjVKPl0sQ4Ct/cc LRlDKh7mkFW9TYP0yI36gdcQjxAv8nFYT7g5F8KIdmJfuUhgnjRMGFT89mSc4oS2 w2CyhSET84anyqZPUrg+Wg1CCK9wpN7/jZb0SHOApDSc0ODJMIE5PpXc5VHodxjM MkcgJuZ25Pk= Received: from pb-smtp20.sea.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE5C27C1C1; Wed, 14 Aug 2019 13:56:24 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.76.80.147]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 262097C1C0; Wed, 14 Aug 2019 13:56:22 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: "Paolo Pettinato \(ppettina\)" Cc: Jeff King , "git\@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: Git fetch bug in git 2.21+ "Could not access submodule '%s'" References: <951a0ac4-592f-d71c-df6a-53a806249f7b@cisco.com> <20190814153607.GB12093@sigill.intra.peff.net> <5a58b0eb-0690-c445-dbfd-bd4c5b614629@cisco.com> Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 10:56:19 -0700 In-Reply-To: <5a58b0eb-0690-c445-dbfd-bd4c5b614629@cisco.com> (Paolo Pettinato's message of "Wed, 14 Aug 2019 17:03:44 +0000") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: D36C32E0-BEBC-11E9-9827-B0405B776F7B-77302942!pb-smtp20.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org "Paolo Pettinato (ppettina)" writes: > Thanks for the reply! > > On 14/08/2019 17:40, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> Why is the user mucking with >> that directory in the first place, and isn't the flagging of the >> situation as an error, done with 26f80ccf ("submodule: migrate >> get_next_submodule to use repository structs", 2018-11-28), a >> bugfix? If not, why not? > > Not sure if you're implying here that this is not a bug; I'd say that: Yeah, sorry for a confused comment. It does feel strange that the error behaviour depends on what is in the working tree for a "fetch", which is between two $GIT_DIR and does not involve the working tree on the receiving side (that brings us back to my earlier comment in the same message).