Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] relative_path should honor dos_drive_prefix
- From
Torsten Bögershausen <tboegi@web.de>
- Date
- Sep 14, 2013, 06:11 UTC
- Message-ID
- <5233FE13.4070006@web.de>
- In-Reply-To
- <79cfcc0c66eb19e3621fff2dafefdddbcbc824cf.1379048276.git.worldhello.net@gmail.com>
On 13.09.13 07:08, Jiang Xin wrote:
Show 36 quoted lines
> Tvangeste found that the "relative_path" function could not work
> properly on Windows if "in" and "prefix" have dos driver prefix.
> ($gmane/234434)
>
> e.g., When execute: test-path-utils relative_path "C:/a/b" "D:/x/y",
> should return "C:/a/b", but returns "../../C:/a/b", which is wrong.
>
> So make relative_path honor dos_drive_prefix, and add test cases
> for it in t0060.
>
> Reported-by: Tvangeste <i.4m.l33t@yandex.ru>
> Helped-by: Johannes Sixt <j6t@kdbg.org>
> Signed-off-by: Jiang Xin <worldhello.net@gmail.com>
> ---
> path.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++
> t/t0060-path-utils.sh | 4 ++++
> 2 files changed, 24 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/path.c b/path.c
> index 9fd28bcd..65d376d 100644
> --- a/path.c
> +++ b/path.c
> @@ -434,6 +434,16 @@ int adjust_shared_perm(const char *path)
> return 0;
> }
>
> +static int have_same_root(const char *path1, const char *path2)
> +{
> + int is_abs1, is_abs2;
> +
> + is_abs1 = is_absolute_path(path1);
> + is_abs2 = is_absolute_path(path2);
> + return (is_abs1 && is_abs2 && tolower(path1[0]) == tolower(path2[0])) ||
> + (!is_abs1 && !is_abs2);
> +}
> +I think the name of the fuction is somewhat misleading, as we are not sure if they really have the same root. And that is investigated further down.
may_have_same_root() could be a better name.
[snip]
Show 15 quoted lines
> while (i < prefix_len && j < in_len && prefix[i] == in[j]) {
> if (is_dir_sep(prefix[i])) {
> while (is_dir_sep(prefix[i]))
> diff --git a/t/t0060-path-utils.sh b/t/t0060-path-utils.sh
> index 82a6f21..0187d11 100755
> --- a/t/t0060-path-utils.sh
> +++ b/t/t0060-path-utils.sh
> @@ -210,6 +210,10 @@ relative_path foo/a/b/ foo/a/b ./
> relative_path foo/a foo/a/b ../
> relative_path foo/x/y foo/a/b ../../x/y
> relative_path foo/a/c foo/a/b ../c
> +relative_path foo/a/b /foo/x/y foo/a/b
> +relative_path /foo/a/b foo/x/y /foo/a/b
> +relative_path d:/a/b D:/a/c ../b MINGW
> +relative_path C:/a/b D:/a/c C:/a/b MINGWSide question: What happens if we feed in a relative path with a dos drive? like "c:foo" which is different from c:/foo.