On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 1:41 PM, Johannes Sixt <j.s...@viscovery.net> wrote:
> Am 8/5/2013 16:23, schrieb Duy Nguyen:
>> close() is added in commit_lock_file(), before rename(), by 4723ee9
>> (Close files opened by lock_file() before unlinking. - 2007-11-13),
>> which is needed by Windows. But doesn't that create a gap between
>> close() and rename() on other platforms where another process can
>> replace .lock file with something else before rename() is executed?
> First, files manipulated by commit_lock_file() are to be opened only using
> lock_file() by definition. Opening such a file in with open() or fopen()
> or renaming it via rename() without using the lockfile.[ch] API is
> possible regardless of whether commit_lock_file() has closed the file or
> not. Such manipulation is already undefined behavior (from Git's point of
> view), and there is nothing we can do about "misbehaving" processes.
> Second, lock_file() uses O_CREAT|O_EXCL, which fails when the file exists,
> regardless of whether it is open or not.
The second process could unlink(.lock file) first, then open it, even
using lock_file(), but I think that falls into your "first" and is an
invalid case from git point of view, so..
> Conclusion: There is no problem.
Agreed. False alarm.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html