From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Eric Lesh Subject: Re: [PATCH] contrib/workdir: add a simple script to create a working directory Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2007 06:50:18 -0700 Message-ID: <1175003418.6140.7.camel@localhost> References: <7vtzw7tvvv.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <20070327003033.4226.8413.julian@quantumfyre.co.uk> <1174963350.6018.3.camel@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Junio C Hamano , git@vger.kernel.org To: Julian Phillips X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Mar 27 15:50:38 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1HWC4H-0004hX-C8 for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Tue, 27 Mar 2007 15:50:33 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753856AbXC0Nu3 (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Mar 2007 09:50:29 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753863AbXC0Nu3 (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Mar 2007 09:50:29 -0400 Received: from smtp-5.smtp.ucla.edu ([169.232.47.137]:57623 "EHLO smtp-5.smtp.ucla.edu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753856AbXC0Nu2 (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Mar 2007 09:50:28 -0400 Received: from mail.ucla.edu (mail.ucla.edu [169.232.46.157]) by smtp-5.smtp.ucla.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l2RDoMT9023326; Tue, 27 Mar 2007 06:50:22 -0700 Received: from [192.168.1.7] (adsl-75-26-185-14.dsl.scrm01.sbcglobal.net [75.26.185.14]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.ucla.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l2RDoMtD020727 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NOT); Tue, 27 Mar 2007 06:50:22 -0700 In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Evolution 2.8.1 X-Probable-Spam: no X-Scanned-By: smtp.ucla.edu on 169.232.47.137 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Tue, 2007-03-27 at 13:59 +0100, Julian Phillips wrote: > > Shouldn't this be made to work with bare repositories as well? > > I guess that depends ... > > There's probably no reason that it couldn't, but it wasn't something that > I was interested in seeing it do. I don't have any bare repositories on > my development machine, and don't anticipate having any in the future. > Also, the symlinked config file will have core.bare = true, which will make anything with require_work_tree refuse to run. (Unless git-sh-setup's is_bare_repository was made to look for .git first, then check for core.bare. But that is probably useless.) You're right in that there may not be many use cases for this. Sorry for the noise. -Eric