based on doc/bugs/FreeBSD_patches.mdwn which indicates it works, though
sadly without anything more than a patch.
If this breaks anything it will be reverted.
This is so, if there's some other failure that triggers it, --debug will
show what went wrong. See https://github.com/datalad/datalad/issues/6708
Sponsored-by: Dartmouth College's Datalad project
test: When limiting tests to run with -p, work around tasty limitation by
automatically including dependent tests.
This fixes a reversion because it didn't used to use dependencies and
forced tasty to run the init tests first. That changed when parallelizing
the test suite.
It will sometimes do a little more work than strictly required,
because it adds init tests deps when limited to eg quickcheck tests,
which don't depend on them. But this only adds a few seconds work.
Sponsored-by: Dartmouth College's Datalad project
This reverts windows-specific parts of 5a98f2d509
There were no code paths in common between windows and unix, so this
will return Windows to the old behavior.
The problem that the commit talks about has to do with multiple different
locations where git-annex can store annex object files, but that is not
too relevant to Windows anyway, because on windows the filesystem is always
treated as criplled and/or symlinks are not supported, so it will only
use one object location. It would need to be using a repo populated
in another OS to have the other object location in use probably.
Then a drop and get could possibly lead to a dangling lock file.
And, I was not able to actually reproduce that situation happening
before making that commit, even when I forced a race. So making these
changes on windows was just begging trouble..
I suspect that the change that caused the reversion is in
Annex/Content/Presence.hs. It checks if the content file exists,
and then called modifyContentDirWhenExists, which seems like it would
not fail, but if something deleted the content file at that point,
that call would fail. Which would result in an exception being thrown,
which should not normally happen from a call to inAnnexSafe. That was a
windows-specific change; the unix side did not have an equivilant
change.
Sponsored-by: Dartmouth College's Datalad project
Deal with git's recent changes to fix CVE-2022-24765, which prevent using
git in a repository owned by someone else.
That makes git config --list not list the repo's configs, only global
configs. So annex.uuid and annex.version are not visible to git-annex.
It displayed a message about that, which is not right for this situation.
Detect the situation and display a better message, similar to the one other
git commands display.
Also, git-annex init when run in that situation would overwrite annex.uuid
with a new one, since it couldn't see the old one. Add a check to prevent
it running too in this situation. It may be that this fix has security
implications, if a config set by the malicious user who owns the repo
causes git or git-annex to run code. I don't think any git-annex configs
get run by git-annex init. It may be that some git config of a command
does get run by one of the git commands that git-annex init runs. ("git
status" is the command that prompted the CVE-2022-24765, since
core.fsmonitor can cause it to run a command). Since I don't know how
to exploit this, I'm not treating it as a security fix for now.
Note that passing --git-dir makes git bypass the security check. git-annex
does pass --git-dir to most calls to git, which it does to avoid needing
chdir to the directory containing a git repository when accessing a remote.
So, it's possible that somewhere in git-annex it gets as far as running git
with --git-dir, and git reads some configs that are unsafe (what
CVE-2022-24765 is about). This seems unlikely, it would have to be part of
git-annex that runs in git repositories that have no (visible) annex.uuid,
and git-annex init is the only one that I can think of that then goes on to
run git, as discussed earlier. But I've not fully ruled out there being
others..
The git developers seem mostly worried about "git status" or a similar
command implicitly run by a shell prompt, not an explicit use of git in
such a repository. For example, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarma wrote:
> * There are other bits of config that also point to executable things,
> e.g. core.editor, aliases etc, but nothing has been found yet that
> provides the "at a distance" effect that the core.fsmonitor vector
> does.
>
> I.e. a user is unlikely to go to /tmp/some-crap/here and run "git
> commit", but they (or their shell prompt) might run "git status", and
> if you have a /tmp/.git ...
Sponsored-by: Jarkko Kniivilä on Patreon
Those segfaults were caused by setEnv, which should have been fixed by
commits 79017c612e16653d00253f6862b925b287102624 and
ebb76f0486.
Sponsored-by: Dartmouth College's Datalad project
