linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Revert "scripts/setlocalversion: git: Make -dirty check more robust"

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20181107.204358.257636196@genki.is>
Date:   Wed, 07 Nov 2018 12:43:58 -0800
From:   Genki Sky <sky@...ki.is>
To:     Brian Norris <briannorris@...omium.org>, lists@...dbynature.de
Cc:     Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>, yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com,
        Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Revert "scripts/setlocalversion: git: Make -dirty check
 more robust"

On Wed, 7 Nov 2018 10:44:37 -0800, Brian Norris <briannorris@...omium.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 06, 2018 at 08:00:36PM -0800, Brian Norris wrote:
> > On a different tangent: how about the --no-optional-locks (see
> > git(1))? Will this get you your "up-to-date" result without writing to
> > the .git directory? I've only read the documentation, but not tested
> > it.

This option definitely seems to be what we want, good find.

> Unfortunately, --no-optional-locks is new as of git 2.14. Dunno how new
> of a git we expect people to use.

Hmm, I'm not sure who can speak to this.

Though if it's too recent, then based on earlier discussion, it sounds
like something like this (hack) might work best:

  [ -w .git ] &&
          touch .git/some-file-here 2>/dev/null &&
          git update-index --refresh --unmerged >/dev/null
  if git diff-index --name-only HEAD | ...