Re: [PATCH v2] merge-recursive: symlink's descendants not in way

> Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com> writes:
> 
> >> OK.  We notice that we need to newly create foo/bar but we
> >> incorrectly find that there is "foo/bar" already because of the
> >> careless use of bare lstat(2) makes "bar" visible as if it were also
> >> "foo/bar".  I wonder if the current code would be confused the same
> >> way if the side branch added "foo/bar/file", or the confusion would
> >> be even worse---it is not dir_in_way() and a different codepath
> >> would be affected, no?
> >
> > I don't think there is a different codepath to be affected - as far as I
> > can tell, dir_in_way() is the only cause (at least of this particular
> > error).
> 
> OK, so existing code already realizes that "foo/bar/file" added in
> the side branch is the one that must survive, and the "bar/file" in
> the current branch does not fool it into thinking that "foo/bar/file"
> is also on our end, and needs to be merged as an add-add conflict.
> It was only the dir-in-the-way logic that was not careful enough?