From: Jeff King Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2013 09:32:22 +0000 (-0500) Subject: setup: suppress implicit "." work-tree for bare repos X-Git-Tag: v1.8.2.1~12^2 X-Git-Url: https://git.lorimer.id.au/gitweb.git/diff_plain/2cd83d10bb6bcf768129e1c4e5a4dee4b6bcd27f?hp=2cd83d10bb6bcf768129e1c4e5a4dee4b6bcd27f setup: suppress implicit "." work-tree for bare repos If an explicit GIT_DIR is given without a working tree, we implicitly assume that the current working directory should be used as the working tree. E.g.,: GIT_DIR=/some/repo.git git status would compare against the cwd. Unfortunately, we fool this rule for sub-invocations of git by setting GIT_DIR internally ourselves. For example: git init foo cd foo/.git git status ;# fails, as we expect git config alias.st status git status ;# does not fail, but should What happens is that we run setup_git_directory when doing alias lookup (since we need to see the config), set GIT_DIR as a result, and then leave GIT_WORK_TREE blank (because we do not have one). Then when we actually run the status command, we do setup_git_directory again, which sees our explicit GIT_DIR and uses the cwd as an implicit worktree. It's tempting to argue that we should be suppressing that second invocation of setup_git_directory, as it could use the values we already found in memory. However, the problem still exists for sub-processes (e.g., if "git status" were an external command). You can see another example with the "--bare" option, which sets GIT_DIR explicitly. For example: git init foo cd foo/.git git status ;# fails git --bare status ;# does NOT fail We need some way of telling sub-processes "even though GIT_DIR is set, do not use cwd as an implicit working tree". We could do it by putting a special token into GIT_WORK_TREE, but the obvious choice (an empty string) has some portability problems. Instead, we add a new boolean variable, GIT_IMPLICIT_WORK_TREE, which suppresses the use of cwd as a working tree when GIT_DIR is set. We trigger the new variable when we know we are in a bare setting. The variable is left intentionally undocumented, as this is an internal detail (for now, anyway). If somebody comes up with a good alternate use for it, and once we are confident we have shaken any bugs out of it, we can consider promoting it further. Signed-off-by: Jeff King Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano ---