Hi Junio,
On Fri, 27 Jan 2017, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Johannes Schindelin writes:
>
> > From: Heiko Voigt
> >
> > The previous implementation said that the filesystem information on
> > Windows is not reliable to determine whether a file is executable. To
> > gather this information it was pe
Johannes Schindelin writes:
> From: Heiko Voigt
>
> The previous implementation said that the filesystem information on
> Windows is not reliable to determine whether a file is executable. To
> gather this information it was peeking into the first two bytes of a
> file to see whether it looks ex
From: Heiko Voigt
The previous implementation said that the filesystem information on
Windows is not reliable to determine whether a file is executable. To
gather this information it was peeking into the first two bytes of a
file to see whether it looks executable.
Apart from the fact that on Wi
Hi Junio,
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 07:02:31PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Junio C Hamano writes:
>
> > My preference is to remove "static int is_executable()" function
> > from help.c, have an...
> > ... I wouldn't mind seeing the implementation of posix_is_executable()
> > in help.c, which wi
Junio C Hamano writes:
> My preference is to remove "static int is_executable()" function
> from help.c, have an...
> ... I wouldn't mind seeing the implementation of posix_is_executable()
> in help.c, which will be dead-code on Windows and Cygwin, if that
> makes linking and Makefile easier.
An
Heiko Voigt writes:
> I do not know why you are against filling that information into "struct
> stat".
Because it is *WRONG*. Isn't it a good enough reason?
If the issue you are trying to solve were """stat emulation on
Windows and Cygwin does not give the correct x-bit (and the user
sometimes
Hi Junio,
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 10:53:55AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Heiko Voigt writes:
>
> > On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 10:48:14AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> >> Heiko Voigt writes:
> >> > What do you think?
> >>
> >> Does having the "stat()" help on Windows in any way? Does it ever
Junio C Hamano writes:
>> diff --git a/help.c b/help.c
>> ...
>> +
>
> Yuck.
>
> Why should we need even a single line of the implementation of a
> function that tells if a given pathname contains an executable
> command, which we know is platform specific?
Sorry; sent without sufficient proof
Heiko Voigt writes:
> On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 10:48:14AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> Heiko Voigt writes:
>> > What do you think?
>>
>> Does having the "stat()" help on Windows in any way? Does it ever
>> return an executable bit by itself?
>
> No, AFAIK it does not return anything about ex
Hi Junio,
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 10:48:14AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Heiko Voigt writes:
> > What do you think?
>
> Does having the "stat()" help on Windows in any way? Does it ever
> return an executable bit by itself?
No, AFAIK it does not return anything about executability. But I th
Heiko Voigt writes:
> Since the code for cygwin and windows in general is almost the same I would
> extract one function for them where I leave in one ifdef for cygwin.
>
> E.g. like this:
>
>
> static int is_executable(const char *name)
> {
> struct stat st;
>
>
On Sat, Aug 11, 2012 at 09:30:06PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Heiko Voigt writes:
>
> > help.c | 15 ---
> > 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/help.c b/help.c
> > index 662349d..b41fa21 100644
> > --- a/help.c
> > +++ b/help.c
> > @@ -103,10 +1
Heiko Voigt writes:
> help.c | 15 ---
> 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/help.c b/help.c
> index 662349d..b41fa21 100644
> --- a/help.c
> +++ b/help.c
> @@ -103,10 +103,19 @@ static int is_executable(const char *name)
> return 0;
>
>
The previous implementation said that the filesystem information on
Windows is not reliable to determine whether a file is executable.
To find gather this information it was peeking into the first two bytes
of a file to see whether it looks executable.
Apart from the fact that on Windows executable
14 matches
Mail list logo