Am 26.04.19 um 22:58 schrieb brian m. carlson:
> On Thu, Apr 25, 2019 at 09:40:34PM +0200, Johannes Sixt wrote:
> I would like to point out that we still have to perform an executability
> check before we run the hook or we'll get errors printed to the user.
That's fine. On Windows, when a hook is
On Thu, Apr 25, 2019 at 09:40:34PM +0200, Johannes Sixt wrote:
> Am 25.04.19 um 02:55 schrieb Junio C Hamano:
> > Johannes Sixt writes:
> >
> >> Furthermore, basing a decision on whether a file is executable won't
> >> work on Windows as intended. So, it is better to aim for an existence
> >> ch
Am 25.04.19 um 02:55 schrieb Junio C Hamano:
> Johannes Sixt writes:
>
>> Furthermore, basing a decision on whether a file is executable won't
>> work on Windows as intended. So, it is better to aim for an existence check.
>
> That is a good point.
>
> So it may be OK for "do we have a single h
Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason writes:
> To me this is another point in favor of bypassing this problem entirely
> and adopting the semantics GitLab (and it seems others) use. I.e. in
> order execute:
>
> .git/hooks/pre-receive .git/hooks/pre-receive.d/*
But isn't that exactly what Brian wanted to
On Thu, Apr 25 2019, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Johannes Sixt writes:
>
>> Furthermore, basing a decision on whether a file is executable won't
>> work on Windows as intended. So, it is better to aim for an existence check.
>
> That is a good point.
>
> So it may be OK for "do we have a single hoo
Johannes Sixt writes:
> Furthermore, basing a decision on whether a file is executable won't
> work on Windows as intended. So, it is better to aim for an existence check.
That is a good point.
So it may be OK for "do we have a single hook script for this hook
name?" to say "no" when the path e
On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 11:27:59AM +0900, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> "brian m. carlson" writes:
> > diff --git a/run-command.c b/run-command.c
> > index 3449db319b..669af5ebc7 100644
> > --- a/run-command.c
> > +++ b/run-command.c
> > @@ -1308,58 +1308,137 @@ int async_with_fork(void)
> > #endif
> >
Am 24.04.19 um 04:27 schrieb Junio C Hamano:
> "brian m. carlson" writes:
>> +static int has_hook(struct strbuf *path, int strip)
>> +{
>> +if (access(path->buf, X_OK) < 0) {
>
> Does ".git/post-commit" that is not an executable exist?
>
> It was perfectly fine for find_hook() to say "there
"brian m. carlson" writes:
> diff --git a/builtin/commit.c b/builtin/commit.c
> index f17537474a..e7cf6b16ba 100644
> --- a/builtin/commit.c
> +++ b/builtin/commit.c
> @@ -666,6 +666,7 @@ static int prepare_to_commit(const char *index_file,
> const char *prefix,
> struct strbuf sb = STRBUF
A variety of types of software take advantage of Git's hooks. However,
if a user would like to integrate multiple pieces of software which use
a particular hook, they currently must manage those hooks themselves,
which can be burdensome. Sometimes various pieces of software try to
overwrite each ot
10 matches
Mail list logo
