Re: untracked symlinks are less precious than untracked files?
- From
Johannes Sixt <j6t@kdbg.org>
- Date
- Feb 2, 2011, 22:24 UTC
- Message-ID
- <201102022324.22123.j6t@kdbg.org>
- In-Reply-To
- <7v7hdixkys.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
On Mittwoch, 2. Februar 2011, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Show 8 quoted lines
> Johannes Sixt <j6t@kdbg.org> writes: > > Is it by design that symlinks are less precious than files, or is it an > > oversight? > > I don't recall making conscious distinction between symmlinks and regular > files, so it is likely to be just a bug. Perhaps using stat() where > lstat() should be used and mistaking an error return as missing, or > something silly like that?
Hm, I don't think so. It seems to interact with the lstat_cache. When lstat reports a symlink, this result is cached; but if it is a regular file, it is not cached. I don't know, what the consequences are, though... I have to stop my investigations for tonight.
-- Hannes