On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 11:42:49AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Jeff King <p...@peff.net> writes:
>
> > On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 12:45:22PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> >
> >> + if (!patch->is_delete && path_is_beyond_symlink(patch->new_name))
> >> + return error(_("affected file '%s' is beyond a symbolic link"),
> >> + patch->new_name);
> >
> > Why does this not kick in when deleting a file?
>
> Half-written logic, forgotten to be revisited (i.e. "ok, anything
> that is not delete we can check new_name, so do that first, later
> we'd deal with deletion patch and I think the way to do so is by
> checking old_name, but let's make sure this case works first").
OK, I was worried I was missing something clever. :)
I agree that checking patch->old_name should work in that case.
-Peff
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
