From 2681aac1a04c59e76d15d1bcb9daafcb2ef43444 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Joey Hess Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2018 11:39:55 -0400 Subject: [PATCH] comment --- ...t_1_0fff7a842609af3531d151425a94df0a._comment | 16 ++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+) create mode 100644 doc/forum/named_pipes_as_arguments/comment_1_0fff7a842609af3531d151425a94df0a._comment diff --git a/doc/forum/named_pipes_as_arguments/comment_1_0fff7a842609af3531d151425a94df0a._comment b/doc/forum/named_pipes_as_arguments/comment_1_0fff7a842609af3531d151425a94df0a._comment new file mode 100644 index 0000000000..2992745fc4 --- /dev/null +++ b/doc/forum/named_pipes_as_arguments/comment_1_0fff7a842609af3531d151425a94df0a._comment @@ -0,0 +1,16 @@ +[[!comment format=mdwn + username="joey" + subject="""comment 1""" + date="2018-12-09T15:38:21Z" + content=""" +I doubt it? + +The two way filesnames are used with git-annex commands are + +1. The name of a file already checked in to the git repository, + here git-annex needs to stat the file so I doubt a named pipe would + work. +2. A file not yet checked into git which is going to be added. + git-annex has to adjust permissions, move the file etc, as well as + reading its content so again a named pipe wouldn't work. +"""]]