On Fri, May 17, 2019 at 2:46 PM Eric Sunshine <sunsh...@sunshineco.com> wrote: > > On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 6:50 AM Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclo...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > find_worktree() can die() unexpectedly because it uses real_path() > > instead of the gentler version. When it's used in 'git worktree add' [1] > > and there's a bad worktree, this die() could prevent people from adding > > new worktrees. > > This is good to know because, to fix [1], I think we'll want to add a > new function[2] akin to find_worktree(), but without magic suffix > matching (that is, just literal absolute path comparison).
Yeah. find_worktree() was made to handle command line options from worktree's move/remove, it's probably a bit too magical for this case. I still want to store relative path in "gitdir" files at some point, which would complicate the last "absolute path comparison" part a bit. But it should be manageable. > [1]: > https://public-inbox.org/git/0308570e-aaa3-43b8-a592-f4da9760d...@synopsys.com/ > [2]: > https://public-inbox.org/git/CAPig+cQh8hxeoVjLHDKhAcZVQPpPT5v0AUY8gsL9=qfj7z-...@mail.gmail.com/ > > > The "bad" condition to trigger this is when a parent of the worktree's > > location is deleted. Then real_path() will complain. > > > > Use the other version so that bad worktrees won't affect 'worktree > > add'. The bad ones will eventually be pruned, we just have to tolerate > > them for a bit. > > The patch itself makes sense, though, as Shaheed noted in his > response, pruning seems to get short-circuited somehow under this > situation; perhaps that needs its own fix, but certainly shouldn't > hold up this fix. I might have missed that detail. Thanks for pointing out. Will get another look. -- Duy
