[Question] check_repository_format_gently() is not side-effect-free
- From
Tian Yuchen <cat@malon.dev>
- Date
- Mar 19, 2026, 17:45 UTC
- Message-ID
- <c0bb931a-3ee6-416b-8ceb-9fab013a621e@malon.dev>
Hi Git community,
In setup.c:
Show 28 quoted lines
> static const char *setup_explicit_git_dir(const char *gitdirenv,
> struct strbuf *cwd,
> struct repository_format *repo_fmt,
> int *nongit_ok)
> {
> const char *work_tree_env = getenv(GIT_WORK_TREE_ENVIRONMENT);
> const char *worktree;
> char *gitfile;
> int offset;
>
> if (PATH_MAX - 40 < strlen(gitdirenv))
> die(_("'$%s' too big"), GIT_DIR_ENVIRONMENT);
>
> gitfile = (char*)read_gitfile(gitdirenv);
> if (gitfile) {
> gitfile = xstrdup(gitfile);
> gitdirenv = gitfile;
> }
>
> if (!is_git_directory(gitdirenv)) {
> if (nongit_ok) {
> *nongit_ok = 1;
> free(gitfile);
> return NULL;
> }
> die(_("not a git repository: '%s'"), gitdirenv);
> }
> ...
> if (check_repository_format_gently(gitdirenv, repo_fmt, nongit_ok)) {
> free(gitfile);
> return NULL;
> }I've noticed that this function behaves rather strangely. If I am correct, The primary purpose of this function is to verify whether the Git binary understands the current repository format.
The implementation is as follows:
Show 44 quoted lines
> static int check_repository_format_gently(const char *gitdir, struct repository_format *candidate, int *nongit_ok)
> {
> struct strbuf sb = STRBUF_INIT;
> struct strbuf err = STRBUF_INIT;
> int has_common;
>
> has_common = get_common_dir(&sb, gitdir);
> strbuf_addstr(&sb, "/config");
> read_repository_format(candidate, sb.buf);
> strbuf_release(&sb);
>
> /*
> * For historical use of check_repository_format() in git-init,
> * we treat a missing config as a silent "ok", even when nongit_ok
> * is unset.
> */
> if (candidate->version < 0)
> return 0;
>
> if (verify_repository_format(candidate, &err) < 0) {
> if (nongit_ok) {
> warning("%s", err.buf);
> strbuf_release(&err);
> *nongit_ok = -1;
> return -1;
> }
> die("%s", err.buf);
> }
>
> the_repository->repository_format_precious_objects = candidate->precious_objects;
>
> string_list_clear(&candidate->unknown_extensions, 0);
> string_list_clear(&candidate->v1_only_extensions, 0);
>
> if (candidate->worktree_config) {
> /*
> * pick up core.bare and core.worktree from per-worktree
> * config if present
> */
> strbuf_addf(&sb, "%s/config.worktree", gitdir);
> git_config_from_file(read_worktree_config, sb.buf, candidate);
> strbuf_release(&sb);
> has_common = 0;
> }...
Show 15 quoted lines
> if (!has_common) {
> if (candidate->is_bare != -1) {
> is_bare_repository_cfg = candidate->is_bare;
> if (is_bare_repository_cfg == 1)
> inside_work_tree = -1;
> }
> if (candidate->work_tree) {
> free(git_work_tree_cfg);
> git_work_tree_cfg = xstrdup(candidate->work_tree);
> inside_work_tree = -1;
> }
> }
>
> return 0;
> }Obviously it applies the parsed results to the global environment. Since this function starts with 'check_' and ends with '_gently,' it's hard not to think of it as a side-effect-free diagnostic function.
git grep "^[a-z_]* check_[a-z_]*(" -- "*.c"Using the command above, we can see that there are other functions in the Git source code that start with 'check_' but are not entirely side-effect-free. However, I believe that the two variables (is_bare_repository_cfg, git_work_tree_cfg) this function modifies are much more crucial: For example, if I want to handle both a bare repository and a normal repository within a single process, wouldn't problems arise soon?
I would love to hear if there are any historical reasons preventing us from stripping these global side-effects out of this function.
Regards,
Yuchen