From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com (pb-smtp2.pobox.com [64.147.108.71]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7A2A71BC073 for ; Wed, 14 Aug 2024 17:15:11 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=64.147.108.71 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1723655712; cv=none; b=pfbetqDnzlylEgidaxKiymyIC9HobHxGApWsx58poaSFECB6MwBmGLihmFlIz7WpGgBBy0u5xfVSSkRVByHHs6r2BvGTqIVTA2Jlm69hW/EQmjoKFIQmCxapnnYs63/rAuHegW9mGsaQhuCrf+dRz6Ibj1r9e0evh6otaWGjYEQ= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1723655712; c=relaxed/simple; bh=CJ7KDsc3DtR7gS2WFX5+C/6/T4rU82wkqkbld19PEtk=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=m8F0PPLwqLzi2BnVNTeXX1c/vnbL213Iixy/8G/u977cx3PKHWsc3pIQKAQonSeBSZUWHOzllSqBZKeV86jH30T6yzOy1mogkkP4B+fXRI0KzkLg9KOQcySsb3RQKqvy7NyzICjm/XEL4kedaZdYMkyPSTy8rH5N7yKhAAal7Qc= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=pobox.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pobox.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b=kvddVlg0; arc=none smtp.client-ip=64.147.108.71 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=pobox.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pobox.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b="kvddVlg0" Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 54BE618B00; Wed, 14 Aug 2024 13:15:10 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from gitster@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=CJ7KDsc3DtR7gS2WFX5+C/6/T4rU82wkqkbld1 9PEtk=; b=kvddVlg0nAJO3/VJnEkHH6gYMvsTbePw8K3H0ZW53Hkl51D5pVTKko g3GR5TknB1mM2fenZCxuumv+b4meR06HprdSoIjv7GMYjjZhmVlbWoS5RTezV68+ Du6DuX+bVPtnr6HFondz1uoMMnSi1lFYEy1BUXYyrEcHTBxCLogM8= Received: from pb-smtp2.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 367CC18AFF; Wed, 14 Aug 2024 13:15:10 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from gitster@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.125.108.217]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C67D618AFD; Wed, 14 Aug 2024 13:15:08 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from gitster@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Phillip Wood Cc: git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] safe.directory: normalize the configured path In-Reply-To: <5e4906be-2cbe-44b5-b490-593ee5a42b95@gmail.com> (Phillip Wood's message of "Wed, 14 Aug 2024 14:20:41 +0100") References: <20240720220915.2933266-1-gitster@pobox.com> <20240723021900.388020-1-gitster@pobox.com> <20240723021900.388020-3-gitster@pobox.com> <5332f244-7476-492a-a797-2ef7ba73f490@gmail.com> <5e4906be-2cbe-44b5-b490-593ee5a42b95@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2024 10:15:06 -0700 Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: C1E788CC-5A60-11EF-9554-9B0F950A682E-77302942!pb-smtp2.pobox.com Phillip Wood writes: > On 25/07/2024 17:11, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> Phillip Wood writes: >> >>> I think this is sensible if the key is an absolute path, if the key is >>> a relative path I think we should ignore it as it is not clear which >>> directory the user meant. >> The only thing that worries me in that proposal is that doing so >> would break a configuration that used to work. I'd rather leave >> the tightening of it to future work with its own justification. > > As far as I know the only caller that tried to match a relative > directory was enter_repo(), all of the other code paths pass an > absolute path from getcwd(). Before this series git daemon required > the relative directory "." to be specified in addition to the absolute > path so that will not be broken by removing support for relative > directories. Are there other users of enter_repo() that still rely on > being able to match relative paths? Offhand I do not know of any, but no guarantees. I am tempted to leave it as a prerequisite task for those who want to tighten this codepath further.