From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 29F49C433E7 for ; Mon, 31 Aug 2020 13:12:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 049A320EDD for ; Mon, 31 Aug 2020 13:12:01 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="oe8Hs5rM" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726144AbgHaNL5 (ORCPT ); Mon, 31 Aug 2020 09:11:57 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:33634 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726167AbgHaNLq (ORCPT ); Mon, 31 Aug 2020 09:11:46 -0400 Received: from mail-pl1-x643.google.com (mail-pl1-x643.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::643]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DCC02C061573 for ; Mon, 31 Aug 2020 06:04:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pl1-x643.google.com with SMTP id q3so2986693pls.11 for ; Mon, 31 Aug 2020 06:04:56 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=xhecWVwTg79GsngLXXeYS8ltRCLyqTfbV4XM2b48u54=; b=oe8Hs5rMVbSWz+3CVpXg2TEm6oD1Bnv2QtEeywaUMMLC7/BD94MNBCRuvgyM2Du2fK 0kMgHPjZuJr9yzoK42u9azu7p8kuMCNfA42AQjH7o4rG1CwZcpdEbn/N9h6MfmiWzgK6 G4Gj+/VoNKrPd8xwUCr9gXPzrGxoE69DTF8pThOSiTKViMxSiVAouTmoas+izlJ6zE2m vuUOeFHmohHp1JC4heZp5fRfOdMQjqfNUJz7vONrBg+NuO0/AcN7zfoe1kvJ1Hnpun89 d4O+EMhrfqEnSlLECerIb+UMS3Lc0KPMACk5xUC1H7LF07XNebwktQ5LrgtO0qlDt89H Gt1Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=xhecWVwTg79GsngLXXeYS8ltRCLyqTfbV4XM2b48u54=; b=bdGMTpG/W4WXL6kxFDaJ285W9qcwrJJ2pzv+XGTbZz4S+8LWzK0YxiPMCprJVXHogy C+NeoJwVq66OPsDjiDrTB8e57pQjZ79Ks3yHNYKHvg8tVn94F/LRv31QFauuHARgggH8 M5A1k7rFCj2XrwLaSOnhBC3iE71b5jdtZxG5Uq4OnRQiy4FdoXqkshn8dN7fhFRfS6ZJ OQBPlsm9ITtVp2nVSGBI2ZfTDhDfs+sICI8BYDQMM2PAhinVBcOvE0q+A56PJc5RKZTY 02gImRWA6u1JFpZpcAtxEhx6soNr+33e1Itz1ZtEwmPlt/NZVC167s/qFg8CccNIRdDw JcKg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5322hKcbmRSmkiHoI1yN9HGT05nDj1S//QF0Smby33cNFDsbTL80 1j9ubU/Um1FYBKwSa0xR0TA3vlv6gpnpVQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwoIMF7Jppu4kXdXs7PISwx0H6bmxewRKY++64qbq6g9GcPVA6t3XuhD/uAG6q1+f0n5d6EVg== X-Received: by 2002:a17:90b:110a:: with SMTP id gi10mr1337048pjb.206.1598879096253; Mon, 31 Aug 2020 06:04:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from konoha ([116.72.196.122]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id ih11sm3596717pjb.51.2020.08.31.06.04.52 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 31 Aug 2020 06:04:55 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2020 18:34:48 +0530 From: Shourya Shukla To: Kaartic Sivaraam Cc: gitster@pobox.com, git@vger.kernel.org, christian.couder@gmail.com, johannes.schindelin@gmx.de, liu.denton@gmail.com Subject: Re: [GSoC][PATCH] submodule: port submodule subcommand 'add' from shell to C Message-ID: <20200831130448.GA119147@konoha> References: <20200824090359.403944-1-shouryashukla.oo@gmail.com> <20200826091502.GA29471@konoha> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On 31/08 01:28, Kaartic Sivaraam wrote: > On Wed, 2020-08-26 at 14:45 +0530, Shourya Shukla wrote: > > On 24/08 11:35, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > > Shourya Shukla writes: > > > > > > The shell version would error out with anything in the index, so I'd > > > expect that a faithful conversion would not call is_directory() nor > > > submodule_from_path() at all---it would just look path up in the_index > > > and complains if anything is found. For example, the quoted part in > > > the original above is what gives the error message when I do > > > > > > $ git submodule add ./Makefile > > > 'Makefile' already exists in the index. > > > > > > I think. And the above code won't trigger the "already exists" at > > > all because 'path' is not a directory. > > > > Alright. That is correct. I tried to use a multitude of functions but > > did not find luck with any of them. The functions I tried: > > > > It would've been nice to see the actual code you tried so that it's > easier for others to more easily identify if you're using the wrong > function or using the correct function in the wrong way. Yeah, that is my fault. I will tag along below. > > - index_path() to check if the path is in the index. For some > > reason, it switched to the 'default' case and return the > > 'unsupported file type' error. > > > > - A combination of doing an OR with index_file_exists() and > > index_dir_exists(). Still no luck. t7406.43 fails. > > > > - Using index_name_pos() along with the above two functions. Again a > > failure in the same test. > > > > I feel that index_name_pos() should suffice this task but it fails in > > t7406.43. The SM is in index since 'git ls-files --error-unmatch s1' > > does return 's1' (s1 is the submodule). What am I missing here? > > > > You're likely missing the fact that you should call `read_cache` before > using `index_name_pos` or the likes of it. Alright, called it. > For instance, the following works without issues for most cases (more > on that below): > > if (read_cache() < 0) > die(_("index file corrupt")); > > cache_pos = cache_name_pos(path, strlen(path)); > if (cache_pos >= 0) { > if (!force) { > die(_("'%s' already exists in the index"), > path); > } > else { > struct cache_entry *ce = the_index.cache[cache_pos]; > > if (!S_ISGITLINK(ce->ce_mode)) > die(_("'%s' already exists in the index and is not a " > "submodule"), path); > } > } I actually did this only using 'index_*()' functions. But made a very very very silly mistake: I did a sizeof() instead of strlen() and I did not notice this until I saw what you did. IDK how I made this mistake. This is what I have done finally: --- if (read_cache() < 0) die(_("index file corrupt")); if (!force) { if (cache_file_exists(path, strlen(path), ignore_case) || cache_dir_exists(path, strlen(path))) die(_("'%s' already exists in the index"), path); } else { int cache_pos = cache_name_pos(path, strlen(path)); struct cache_entry *ce = the_index.cache[cache_pos]; if (cache_pos >= 0 && !S_ISGITLINK(ce->ce_mode)) die(_("'%s' already exists in the index and is not a " "submodule"), path); } --- I did not put the 'cache_pos >= 0' at the start since I thought that it will unnecessarily increase an indentation level. Since we are using 'cache_{file,dir}_exists' in the first check and 'cache_name_pos()' in the second, the placement of check at another indentation level would be unnecessary. What do you think about this? > This is more close to what the shell version did but misses one case > which might or might not be covered by the test suite[1]. The case when > path is a directory that has tracked contents. In the shell version we > would get: > > $ git submodule add ../git-crypt/ builtin > 'builtin' already exists in the index > $ git submodule add --force ../git-crypt/ builtin > 'builtin' already exists in the index and is not a submodule > > In the C version with the above snippet we get: > > $ git submodule add --force ../git-crypt/ builtin > fatal: 'builtin' does not have a commit checked out > $ git submodule add ../git-crypt/ builtin > fatal: 'builtin' does not have a commit checked out > > That's not appropriate and should be fixed. I believe we could do > something with `cache_dir_exists` to fix this. > > > Footnote > === > > [1]: If it's not covered already, it might be a good idea to add a test > for the above case. Like Junio said, we do not care if it is a file or a directory of any sorts, we will give the error if it already exists. Therefore, even if it is an untracked or a tracked one, it should not matter to us. Hence testing for it may not be necessary is what I feel. Why should we test it?