From: Clemens Buchacher Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2011 20:20:23 GMT Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH 0/2] unpack-trees: handle lstat failures in verify_absent Message-ID: <20110113202023.GA15912@localhost> In-Reply-To: <20110113022415.GA8635@burratino> On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 08:24:15PM -0600, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > > Here are two cases where we ignore the result from lstat in > unpack_trees. I think we rather shouldn't ignore it. Sane? Looks good. Thanks. But in addition to the ones you fixed, lstat errors returned by lstat_cache_matchlen() in check_leading_path() are also ignored. I was actually hoping to restructure this into two functions. 1) check_path() to see if we need to overwrite anything (leading directory _or_ file of the same name) 2) check_ok_to_remove() to check if we can safely overwrite that directory or file All the lstat handling would go into check_path(), and check_ok_to_remove() can reuse the stat returned by check_path(). But right now I can't say when I will find the time. Clemens