Re: [PATCH 2/7] submodule foreach: correct path computation in recursive submodules

2016-03-29 Thread Stefan Beller
On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 12:21 PM, Stefan Beller wrote: > On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 12:00 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> Junio C Hamano writes: >> >>> Stefan Beller writes: >>> The test which is fixed by this patch would report Entering 'nested1/nested2/../nested3' instead of the

Re: [PATCH 2/7] submodule foreach: correct path computation in recursive submodules

2016-03-29 Thread Stefan Beller
On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 12:00 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Junio C Hamano writes: > >> Stefan Beller writes: >> >>> The test which is fixed by this patch would report >>> Entering 'nested1/nested2/../nested3' >>> instead of the expected >>> Entering '../nested1/nested2/nested3' >>> >>> be

Re: [PATCH 2/7] submodule foreach: correct path computation in recursive submodules

2016-03-29 Thread Junio C Hamano
Junio C Hamano writes: > Stefan Beller writes: > >> The test which is fixed by this patch would report >> Entering 'nested1/nested2/../nested3' >> instead of the expected >> Entering '../nested1/nested2/nested3' >> >> because the prefix is put unconditionally in front and after that a >>

Re: [PATCH 2/7] submodule foreach: correct path computation in recursive submodules

2016-03-28 Thread Junio C Hamano
Stefan Beller writes: > The test which is fixed by this patch would report > Entering 'nested1/nested2/../nested3' > instead of the expected > Entering '../nested1/nested2/nested3' > > because the prefix is put unconditionally in front and after that a > computed display path with is affe

[PATCH 2/7] submodule foreach: correct path computation in recursive submodules

2016-03-28 Thread Stefan Beller
The test which is fixed by this patch would report Entering 'nested1/nested2/../nested3' instead of the expected Entering '../nested1/nested2/nested3' because the prefix is put unconditionally in front and after that a computed display path with is affected by `wt_prefix`. This is wrong as