Mark some tests that match "*apply*" as passing when git is compiled
with SANITIZE=leak. They'll now be listed as running under the
"GIT_TEST_PASSING_SANITIZE_LEAK=true" test mode (the "linux-leaks" CI
target).
Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
When running this test in Cygwin, it's necessary to remove the inherited
access control lists from the Git working directory in order for later
permissions tests to work as expected.
As such, fix an error in the test script so that the ACLs are set for
the working directory, not a nonexistent subdirectory.
Signed-off-by: Adam Dinwoodie <adam@dinwoodie.org>
Reviewed-by: Matheus Tavares <matheus.bernardino@usp.br>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
core.sharedRepository defines which permissions Git should set when
creating files in $GIT_DIR, so that the repository may be shared with
other users. But (in its current form) the setting shouldn't affect how
files are created in the working tree. This is not respected by apply
and am (which uses apply), when creating leading directories:
$ cat d.patch
diff --git a/d/f b/d/f
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..e69de29
Apply without the setting:
$ umask 0077
$ git apply d.patch
$ ls -ld d
drwx------
Apply with the setting:
$ umask 0077
$ git -c core.sharedRepository=0770 apply d.patch
$ ls -ld d
drwxrws---
Only the leading directories are affected. That's because they are
created with safe_create_leading_directories(), which calls
adjust_shared_perm() to set the directories' permissions based on
core.sharedRepository. To fix that, let's introduce a variant of this
function that ignores the setting, and use it in apply. Also add a
regression test and a note in the function documentation about the use
of each variant according to the destination (working tree or git
dir).
Signed-off-by: Matheus Tavares <matheus.bernardino@usp.br>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
An empty string as mode specification is accepted silently by git apply,
as Vegard Nossum found out using AFL. It's interpreted as zero. Reject
such bogus file modes, and only accept ones consisting exclusively of
octal digits.
Reported-by: Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@oracle.com>
Signed-off-by: Rene Scharfe <l.s.r@web.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
This way, test authors don't need to remember to source
lib-prereq-FILEMODE.sh before using the FILEMODE prereq to guard tests
that rely on the executable bit being honored when checking out files.
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Change the five tests that were all checking "git config --bool
core.filemode" to use a new FILEMODE prerequisite in
lib-prereq-FILEMODE.sh.
Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
A git patch that does not change the executable bit records the mode bits
on its "index" line. "git apply" used to interpret this mode exactly the
same way as it interprets the mode recorded on "new mode" line, as the
wish by the patch submitter to set the mode to the one recorded on the
line.
The reason the mode does not agree between the submitter and the receiver
in the first place is because there is _another_ commit that only appears
on one side but not the other since their histories diverged, and that
commit changes the mode. The patch has "index" line but not "new mode"
line because its change is about updating the contents without affecting
the mode. The application of such a patch is an explicit wish by the
submitter to only cherry-pick the commit that updates the contents without
cherry-picking the commit that modifies the mode. Viewed this way, the
current behaviour is problematic, even though the command does warn when
the mode of the path being patched does not match this mode, and a careful
user could detect this inconsistencies between the patch submitter and the
patch receiver.
This changes the semantics of the mode recorded on the "index" line;
instead of interpreting it as the submitter's wish to set the mode to the
recorded value, it merely informs what the mode submitter happened to
have, and the presense of the "index" line is taken as submitter's wish to
keep whatever the mode is on the receiving end.
This is based on the patch originally done by Alexander Potashev with a
minor fix; the tests are mine.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
