Re: untracked symlinks are less precious than untracked files?

On Mittwoch, 2. Februar 2011, Junio C Hamano wrote:

Johannes Sixt [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

Is it by design that symlinks are less precious than files, or is it an
oversight?

I don't recall making conscious distinction between symmlinks and regular
files, so it is likely to be just a bug. Perhaps using stat() where
lstat() should be used and mistaking an error return as missing, or
something silly like that?

Hm, I don't think so. It seems to interact with the lstat_cache. When lstat 
reports a symlink, this result is cached; but if it is a regular file, it is 
not cached. I don't know, what the consequences are, though... I have to stop 
my investigations for tonight.

-- Hannes