From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: error: Unable to append to .git/logs/refs/remotes/origin/master: Permission denied Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2009 04:06:50 -0400 Message-ID: <20090429080650.GA25227@coredump.intra.peff.net> References: <20090428073138.GA9094@elte.hu> <20090429032943.GB8826@coredump.intra.peff.net> <20090429040719.GA14912@coredump.intra.peff.net> <20090429073256.GB22129@elte.hu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: Ingo Molnar X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Apr 29 10:07:09 2009 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 1Lz4or-0006Yo-AN for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Wed, 29 Apr 2009 10:07:05 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757086AbZD2IG4 (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Apr 2009 04:06:56 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753831AbZD2IG4 (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Apr 2009 04:06:56 -0400 Received: from peff.net ([208.65.91.99]:44387 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757330AbZD2IGx (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Apr 2009 04:06:53 -0400 Received: (qmail 3458 invoked by uid 107); 29 Apr 2009 08:07:06 -0000 Received: from coredump.intra.peff.net (HELO coredump.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.2) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.40) with (AES128-SHA encrypted) SMTP; Wed, 29 Apr 2009 04:07:06 -0400 Received: by coredump.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Wed, 29 Apr 2009 04:06:50 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090429073256.GB22129@elte.hu> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 09:32:56AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > So I think we would need to simulate the errno setting, like the > > patch below. That should generate the hint only when it would > > actually be useful. > > it wasnt hard to figure out what's going on. So this was more of a > FYI, not really a bug report. Maybe if someone tries to pull into a > read-only repo the same could happen? My particular breakage (of a > single ref being root-owned - the rest was mingo owned) is atypical > enough to be ignored. Actually, it is a little bit tough to get your breakage. A pure read-only repo would error out much earlier (permission denied on FETCH_HEAD or writing to object db). But if yours was just "accidentally fetched once as root", then that doesn't seem too uncommon. > If there's no easy/clean solution then please ignore my report. I think the patch I posted isn't too bad. We'll see what others say. -Peff