git init permissions?

Hi list,

Maybe a silly question but I couldn't figure out the answer.

I'm looking at the git init --shared=group result and see:

drwxrwsr-x 7 ferry ferry  111 2009-04-14 19:51 .
drwxrwxr-x 3 ferry ferry   17 2009-04-14 19:51 ..
drwxrwxr-x 2 ferry ferry    6 2009-04-14 19:51 branches
-rw-rw-r-- 1 ferry ferry  127 2009-04-14 19:51 config
-rw-rw-r-- 1 ferry ferry   58 2009-04-14 19:51 description
-rw-rw-r-- 1 ferry ferry   23 2009-04-14 19:51 HEAD
drwxrwxr-x 2 ferry ferry 4.0K 2009-04-14 19:51 hooks
drwxrwxr-x 2 ferry ferry   20 2009-04-14 19:51 info
drwxrwsr-x 4 ferry ferry   28 2009-04-14 19:51 objects
drwxrwsr-x 4 ferry ferry   29 2009-04-14 19:51 refs

Is there some kind of reason that the branches directory is
not created with +s permissions?

I can understand it for the hooks and info directories since
you can not push into those. You _can_ however push into
branches and I would expect it to have +s too, like objects
and refs.

Bug or my misunderstanding?

git version 1.6.0.6

Hi,

On Tue, 14 Apr 2009 20:09:50 +0200, "Ferry Huberts (Pelagic)"
[off-list ref] wrote:

Is there some kind of reason that the branches directory is
not created with +s permissions?

Probably because it isn't really used anymore. It's more like a
historical artifact. Branch refs actually live in refs/heads/ and the
like (or in the packed-refs file).

-Jan

On Tuesday 14 April 2009, Ferry Huberts (Pelagic) wrote:

I'm looking at the git init --shared=group result and see:

drwxrwsr-x 7 ferry ferry  111 2009-04-14 19:51 .
drwxrwxr-x 3 ferry ferry   17 2009-04-14 19:51 ..
drwxrwxr-x 2 ferry ferry    6 2009-04-14 19:51 branches
-rw-rw-r-- 1 ferry ferry  127 2009-04-14 19:51 config
-rw-rw-r-- 1 ferry ferry   58 2009-04-14 19:51 description
-rw-rw-r-- 1 ferry ferry   23 2009-04-14 19:51 HEAD
drwxrwxr-x 2 ferry ferry 4.0K 2009-04-14 19:51 hooks
drwxrwxr-x 2 ferry ferry   20 2009-04-14 19:51 info
drwxrwsr-x 4 ferry ferry   28 2009-04-14 19:51 objects
drwxrwsr-x 4 ferry ferry   29 2009-04-14 19:51 refs

Is there some kind of reason that the branches directory is
not created with +s permissions?

I can understand it for the hooks and info directories since
you can not push into those. You _can_ however push into
branches and I would expect it to have +s too, like objects
and refs.

Bug or my misunderstanding?

git version 1.6.0.6

This was caused by the template files not getting adjusted permissions set 
correctly when copied into a new repository (by git init).

This has been fixed (along with other --shared issues) in v1.6.2.3. Please 
upgrade, if possible.


Have fun! :)

...Johan

-- 
Johan Herland, [off-list ref]
www.herland.net

Johan Herland wrote:

On Tuesday 14 April 2009, Ferry Huberts (Pelagic) wrote:

quoted

I'm looking at the git init --shared=group result and see:

drwxrwsr-x 7 ferry ferry  111 2009-04-14 19:51 .
drwxrwxr-x 3 ferry ferry   17 2009-04-14 19:51 ..
drwxrwxr-x 2 ferry ferry    6 2009-04-14 19:51 branches
-rw-rw-r-- 1 ferry ferry  127 2009-04-14 19:51 config
-rw-rw-r-- 1 ferry ferry   58 2009-04-14 19:51 description
-rw-rw-r-- 1 ferry ferry   23 2009-04-14 19:51 HEAD
drwxrwxr-x 2 ferry ferry 4.0K 2009-04-14 19:51 hooks
drwxrwxr-x 2 ferry ferry   20 2009-04-14 19:51 info
drwxrwsr-x 4 ferry ferry   28 2009-04-14 19:51 objects
drwxrwsr-x 4 ferry ferry   29 2009-04-14 19:51 refs

Is there some kind of reason that the branches directory is
not created with +s permissions?

I can understand it for the hooks and info directories since
you can not push into those. You _can_ however push into
branches and I would expect it to have +s too, like objects
and refs.

Bug or my misunderstanding?

git version 1.6.0.6

This was caused by the template files not getting adjusted permissions set 
correctly when copied into a new repository (by git init).

This has been fixed (along with other --shared issues) in v1.6.2.3. Please 
upgrade, if possible.

unfortunately that's not possible since I'm on RHEL.

thanks for the asnwers guys!

Ferry Huberts (Pelagic) wrote:

Johan Herland wrote:

quoted

This has been fixed (along with other --shared issues) in v1.6.2.3.
Please upgrade, if possible.

unfortunately that's not possible since I'm on RHEL.

Out of curiosity, why not?  I'm not aware of any official git-1.6.0.6
builds for RHEL, so you must already be using git from a third-party
repository.

-- 
Todd        OpenPGP -> KeyID: 0xBEAF0CE3 | URL: www.pobox.com/~tmz/pgp
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
When correctly viewed, everything is lewd.
    -- Tom Lehrer

Todd Zullinger wrote:

Ferry Huberts (Pelagic) wrote:

quoted

Johan Herland wrote:

quoted

This has been fixed (along with other --shared issues) in v1.6.2.3.
Please upgrade, if possible.

unfortunately that's not possible since I'm on RHEL.

Out of curiosity, why not?  I'm not aware of any official git-1.6.0.6
builds for RHEL, so you must already be using git from a third-party
repository.

I did the test on my fedora system. the git version on rhel is even
older than 1606