Re: [PATCH 1/2] test-path-utils.c: remove incorrect assumption

2015-10-09 Thread Ray Donnelly
On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 2:05 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > I'll squash this in as part of your first patch that removes the > test from test-path-utils.c. That makes it clearer why it is the > right thing to remove the test, I'd think. > Great, many thanks! > Thanks. > -- To unsubscribe from this

Re: [PATCH 1/2] test-path-utils.c: remove incorrect assumption

2015-10-08 Thread Junio C Hamano
I'll squash this in as part of your first patch that removes the test from test-path-utils.c. That makes it clearer why it is the right thing to remove the test, I'd think. Thanks. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel

Re: [PATCH 1/2] test-path-utils.c: remove incorrect assumption

2015-10-08 Thread Ray Donnelly
On Mon, Oct 5, 2015 at 12:36 AM, Ray Donnelly wrote: > On Sun, Oct 4, 2015 at 6:21 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> Ray Donnelly writes: >> Some callers of this function in real code (i.e. not the one you are removing the check) do seem to depend on that condition, e.g. the codepath i

Re: [PATCH 1/2] test-path-utils.c: remove incorrect assumption

2015-10-04 Thread Ray Donnelly
On Sun, Oct 4, 2015 at 6:21 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Ray Donnelly writes: > >>> Some callers of this function in real code (i.e. not the one you are >>> removing the check) do seem to depend on that condition, e.g. the >>> codepath in clone that leads to add_to_alternates_file() wants to >>> m

Re: [PATCH 1/2] test-path-utils.c: remove incorrect assumption

2015-10-04 Thread Junio C Hamano
Ray Donnelly writes: >> Some callers of this function in real code (i.e. not the one you are >> removing the check) do seem to depend on that condition, e.g. the >> codepath in clone that leads to add_to_alternates_file() wants to >> make sure it does not add an duplicate, so it may end up not no

Re: [PATCH 1/2] test-path-utils.c: remove incorrect assumption

2015-10-04 Thread Ray Donnelly
On Sat, Oct 3, 2015 at 6:13 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Ray Donnelly writes: > >> In normalize_ceiling_entry(), we test that normalized paths end with >> slash, *unless* the path to be normalized was already the root >> directory. >> >> However, normalize_path_copy() does not even enforce this co

Re: [PATCH 1/2] test-path-utils.c: remove incorrect assumption

2015-10-03 Thread Junio C Hamano
Ray Donnelly writes: > In normalize_ceiling_entry(), we test that normalized paths end with > slash, *unless* the path to be normalized was already the root > directory. > > However, normalize_path_copy() does not even enforce this condition. Perhaps the real issue to be addressed is the above,

Re: [PATCH 1/2] test-path-utils.c: remove incorrect assumption

2015-10-03 Thread Ray Donnelly
I'm going to have to attach this as a file, git-send-email isn't working for me; apologies. On Sat, Oct 3, 2015 at 1:44 PM, Ray Donnelly wrote: > In normalize_ceiling_entry(), we test that normalized paths end with > slash, *unless* the path to be normalized was already the root > directory. > >

[PATCH 1/2] test-path-utils.c: remove incorrect assumption

2015-10-03 Thread Ray Donnelly
In normalize_ceiling_entry(), we test that normalized paths end with slash, *unless* the path to be normalized was already the root directory. However, normalize_path_copy() does not even enforce this condition. Even worse: on Windows, the root directory gets translated into a Windows directory b