Re: [PATCH] help: correct behavior for is_executable on Windows

Hi Junio, On Fri, 27 Jan 2017, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Johannes Schindelin writes: > > > From: Heiko Voigt > > > > The previous implementation said that the filesystem information on > > Windows is not reliable to determine whether a file is

Re: [PATCH] help: correct behavior for is_executable on Windows

Johannes Schindelin writes: > From: Heiko Voigt > > The previous implementation said that the filesystem information on > Windows is not reliable to determine whether a file is executable. To > gather this information it was peeking into the first

Re: [PATCH] help: correct behavior for is_executable on Windows

Hi Junio, On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 07:02:31PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com writes: My preference is to remove static int is_executable() function from help.c, have an... ... I wouldn't mind seeing the implementation of posix_is_executable() in help.c,

Re: [PATCH] help: correct behavior for is_executable on Windows

Hi Junio, On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 10:48:14AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: Heiko Voigt hvo...@hvoigt.net writes: What do you think? Does having the stat() help on Windows in any way? Does it ever return an executable bit by itself? No, AFAIK it does not return anything about

Re: [PATCH] help: correct behavior for is_executable on Windows

Heiko Voigt hvo...@hvoigt.net writes: On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 10:48:14AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: Heiko Voigt hvo...@hvoigt.net writes: What do you think? Does having the stat() help on Windows in any way? Does it ever return an executable bit by itself? No, AFAIK it does not

Re: [PATCH] help: correct behavior for is_executable on Windows

Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com writes: diff --git a/help.c b/help.c ... + Yuck. Why should we need even a single line of the implementation of a function that tells if a given pathname contains an executable command, which we know is platform specific? Sorry; sent without sufficient

Re: [PATCH] help: correct behavior for is_executable on Windows

Hi Junio, On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 10:53:55AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: Heiko Voigt hvo...@hvoigt.net writes: On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 10:48:14AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: Heiko Voigt hvo...@hvoigt.net writes: What do you think? Does having the stat() help on Windows in any

Re: [PATCH] help: correct behavior for is_executable on Windows

Heiko Voigt hvo...@hvoigt.net writes: I do not know why you are against filling that information into struct stat. Because it is *WRONG*. Isn't it a good enough reason? If the issue you are trying to solve were stat emulation on Windows and Cygwin does not give the correct x-bit (and the

Re: [PATCH] help: correct behavior for is_executable on Windows

Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com writes: My preference is to remove static int is_executable() function from help.c, have an... ... I wouldn't mind seeing the implementation of posix_is_executable() in help.c, which will be dead-code on Windows and Cygwin, if that makes linking and Makefile

Re: [PATCH] help: correct behavior for is_executable on Windows

Heiko Voigt hvo...@hvoigt.net writes: Since the code for cygwin and windows in general is almost the same I would extract one function for them where I leave in one ifdef for cygwin. E.g. like this: static int is_executable(const char *name) { struct stat st;

Re: [PATCH] help: correct behavior for is_executable on Windows

Heiko Voigt hvo...@hvoigt.net writes: help.c | 15 --- 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/help.c b/help.c index 662349d..b41fa21 100644 --- a/help.c +++ b/help.c @@ -103,10 +103,19 @@ static int is_executable(const char *name) return