Re: [PATCH v5 3/3] cat-file: add --follow-symlinks to --batch

From

Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>

Date

May 12, 2015, 23:02 UTC

Message-ID

<xmqq617xe6x8.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com>

In-Reply-To

<1431470204.16652.52.camel@ubuntu>

David Turner <dturner@twopensource.com> writes:

> On Tue, 2015-05-12 at 13:22 -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
>> Are there other cases?  The only other case I think of is when the
>> link resolves cleanly inside the tree, which you already handle.

Funny double-inclusion ;-)

> While updating the tests, I noticed another two cases:
> 1. HEAD:broken-link/file
>
> I am inclined to describe this as "dangling" as well.  (It is not useful
> to tell users that "file" is the remaining bit to be resolved, because
> due to chains of symlinks, users have no idea what file would be
> relative to).  I think the filesystem returns ENOENT in the equivalent
> case.
>
> 2. HEAD:link-to-file/file
>
> This should be "notdir", I think, in that it is a distinct way of
> failing that the user might care to know. The filesystem returns ENOTDIR
> in the equivalent case.

Thanks.

> In addition, I would like to have the format for the dangling, loop, and
> notdir cases match the missing case.  In other words, "HEAD:link
> missing", "HEAD:link dangling", etc.  Users already need to parse the
> missing case, so we might as well make the others match.