Re: [PATCH v2] Submodule merge support
From: Shawn O. Pearce <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 22:43:11
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
@@ -574,6 +575,21 @@ static void update_file_flags(const unsigned char *sha, void *buf; unsigned long size; + if (S_ISDIRLNK(mode)) { + /* defer dirlinks to another process, don't try to */ + /* read the object "sha" here */ + const char *dirlink_checkout[] = { + "dirlink-checkout", path, sha1_to_hex(sha), NULL + }; + struct child_process cmd = { + .argv = dirlink_checkout, + .git_cmd = 1, + };
My Solaris 9 system cannot compile this syntax, even though it is a clean way to initalize the child_process. That's why I've always used something more like: struct child_process cmd; memset(&cmd, 0, sizeof(cmd)); cmd.argv = dirlink_checkout; cmd.git_cmd = 1; and actually that raises another point, does the compiler 0 fill the stack-allocated struct that is initalized like you write, or does it avoid filling the other fields that aren't mentioned in the initialization?
+ status = read(cmd.out, hex, sizeof(hex)); + if (status != 40) return status;
OK, this is probably just never trusting the OS, but shouldn't that read be wrapped up in a loop, like our read_in_full? We want 40 bytes here, and expect it, and the read call is allowed to return as few as 1 byte.... -- Shawn.