Re: [PATCH 00/14] Add submodule test harness

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Jul 9, 2014, 21:57 UTC
Message-ID: <xmqqion69ovj.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com>
In-Reply-To: <20140709195619.GA17454@dcvr.yhbt.net>

Eric Wong <normalperson@yhbt.net> writes:

Show 30 quoted lines

> Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
>> Johannes Sixt <j6t@kdbg.org> writes:
>> > Am 08.07.2014 21:34, schrieb Jens Lehmann:
>> >>> And Msysgit complains 
>> >>> error: fchmod on c:/xxxt/trash directory.t7613-merge-submodule/submodule_update_repo/.git/modules/sub1/config.lock failed: Function not implemented
>> >> 
>> >> I'm not sure what this is about, seems to happen during the "cp -R" of
>> >> the repo under .git/modules into the submodule.
>> >
>> > No. It happens because fchmod() is not implemented in our Windows port.
>> >
>> > Please see my band-aid patch at
>> > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/248154/focus=20266
>> > The sub-thread ended inconclusive.
>> 
>> We need to start somewhere, and a no-op fchmod() in your patch may
>> be as a good place to start as anything.  At least we would then
>> keep the old behaviour without introducing any new failure.
>
> Right, this likely makes the most sense for single-user systems or
> systesm without a *nix-like permission system.
>
>> An alternative might be to use chmod() after we are done writing to
>> the config.lock in order to avoid the use of fchmod() altogether,
>> which I think can replace the existing two callsites of fchmod().
>> That approach might be a more expedient, but may turn out to be
>> undesirable in the longer term.
>
> In that case, we would need to open with mode=0600 to avoid a window
> where the file may be world-readable with any data in it.

Yes, of course.

To elaborate what I was alluding to at the end of the message you are responding to a bit more, if we were to move this "grab perms from existing file (if there is any) and propagate to the new one" into the lockfile API,

 - in hold_lock_file_for_update(), we would record the permission of
   the original file, if any, to a new field in "struct lock_file";
 - open with 0600 or tighter in lock_file(), and

 - either before closing the file use fchmod() or after closing and
   moving the file use chmod() to propagate the permission.

If the original did not exist, we would pass 0666 to open as before in lock_file() and do not bother chmod/fchmod at the end.

Or something like that, perhaps.