# sharp edges in Git configuration files

2 messages from 2026-10-31 to 2026-10-31. Participants: Chris Torek, brian m. carlson.
Thread: https://gitlist.dev/t/66721

## Chris Torek, 2026-10-31 02:56

Subject: sharp edges in Git configuration files
Message-ID: <CAPx1Gvd3rAcgDf-rBPOuZFf2=Y+=JxJDdr6AJTvdtpL6Vsk43w@mail.gmail.com>
URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/CAPx1Gvd3rAcgDf-rBPOuZFf2%3DY%2B%3DJxJDdr6AJTvdtpL6Vsk43w%40mail.gmail.com

```
(let's try this again and see if gmail html-izes AGAIN on me...)

This isn't any kind of serious bug, but I have been playing with Git
configuration files to determine a lot of precise details about
behavior when reading or changing them, both with "git config" and
with the implicit changes made by "git branch", "git remote", and
other internal operations.

Anyway, one edge case that causes problems occurs if a user manually
edits a ".git/config" file to add include directives. For instance,
it's possible to take one or more [remote] or [branch] sections out
into a separate file.  The following "ed" command will do this (not
very safely, don't do it on any repo you care about, just in case):

ed - .git/config <<'END'
/^\[remote /,$w .git/inc-remote
/^\[remote /,$d
a
[include]
        path = inc-remote
.
w
q
END

after which some "git remote" operations that try to update the
remotes just fail bizarrely.

(Note: gmail may have whacked white space above, I've set it to send
plain text but gmail is...what it is.)

The obvious thing with "doctor it hurts when I do this" is of course
"well don't do that", and nobody should be splitting their .git/config
into multiple included sub-config-files. But, in the spirit of robust
software (and perhaps just as leftover bits?), it might be wise to
make Git ignore include lines in config files that are intended to be
Git-managed directly, such as .git/config.

Chris


```

## brian m. carlson, 2026-10-31 17:26

Subject: Re: sharp edges in Git configuration files
Message-ID: <auYk201o4foYWl2d@fruit.crustytoothpaste.net>
URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/auYk201o4foYWl2d%40fruit.crustytoothpaste.net
In-Reply-To: <CAPx1Gvd3rAcgDf-rBPOuZFf2=Y+=JxJDdr6AJTvdtpL6Vsk43w@mail.gmail.com>

```
On 2026-10-31 at 02:56:44, Chris Torek wrote:
> The obvious thing with "doctor it hurts when I do this" is of course
> "well don't do that", and nobody should be splitting their .git/config
> into multiple included sub-config-files. But, in the spirit of robust
> software (and perhaps just as leftover bits?), it might be wise to
> make Git ignore include lines in config files that are intended to be
> Git-managed directly, such as .git/config.

I actually believe we're using includes for `.git/config` in some cases
at work and I'm pretty sure my colleagues do want them to continue to
work.

I don't know exactly why they're doing that, since I'm not intimately
involved with that project, but I will point out that our fork of Git
has a checksum that includes the `config` file (but not included files)
and that must be in sync across replicas, so they may be doing so to
test out a config setting on a particular host during development.  In
any event, I'd say that while it may seem bizarre, some people might
want to do this for other reasons[0], so we probably shouldn't break it.

[0] One reason I can imagine is personal configuration (via
`path=~/...`) in large shared repositories.  Yes, people shouldn't be
doing that, but we know they do.
-- 
brian m. carlson (they/them)
Toronto, Ontario, CA
Speaking for myself only

```