Timeline for git hook permission problem
Current License: CC BY-SA 2.5
11 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 9, 2010 at 17:45 | comment | added | Cascabel |
@g1t: If you really need to push non-fast-forward updates to that specific repo, why don't you just set receive.denyNonFastForwards to false?
|
|
| Dec 9, 2010 at 13:16 | comment | added | g1t |
Rudi .. receive.denyNonFastforwards = true on the /path/to/staging. I also tried the git revert there and since it is --bare, here's what I get : fatal: This operation must be run in a work tree. I know I can probably run the commit from developer1 instead. However, I wanted to have a kind of master reset where I could just log onto /path/to/staging or /live/website and step-down to a stable version instead of figuring out which developer made the change and then doing a git revert. Is this possible? Would I be able to go to a older commit, pull the change from dev1 and then cont
|
|
| Dec 9, 2010 at 12:06 | comment | added | Rudi |
A better way is to git revert the faulty commit (git revert creates a commit which undo the specified commit). Also you can add a development branch in path/to/staging/, and only merge the development branch to master after a review. See stevelosh.com/blog/2010/05/mercurial-workflows-stable-default and nvie.com/posts/a-successful-git-branching-model for more branch strategies.
|
|
| Dec 9, 2010 at 12:03 | comment | added | Rudi |
It seems that receive.denyNonFastforwards is set to true on path/to/staging/. You can check this with cd path/to/staging/ && git config --get-all receive.denyNonFastforwards. If the result is true, then this repo is configured to refuse non-fast-forward updates. While you can change this configuration, a change will not solve your problem*: The commit you pruned with this push is still in a repo of another developer, so if this developer pushes his branch again, the faulty commit will reappear. The other developer will not even notice that you removed this commit from the branch.
|
|
| Dec 9, 2010 at 9:55 | history | edited | Rudi | CC BY-SA 2.5 |
link adjusted
|
| Dec 9, 2010 at 9:54 | comment | added | Rudi |
Did you cloned /live/website from a developer account or the webserver account? Does it work when you chown -R webserver-user-account /live/website?
|
|
| Dec 9, 2010 at 9:35 | comment | added | g1t | The files in .git/objects are all 0777, so I'm not sure why is there still a permission error ... | |
| Dec 9, 2010 at 9:02 | comment | added | Rudi |
As for the /live/website part: Do you have set up the /path/to/staging repo yet? If so the /live/website must be a non-bare repo, since you want the files appearing there. I suggest to move the current /live/website path away and replace it with a regular clone of /live/website.
|
|
| Dec 9, 2010 at 8:57 | comment | added | Rudi | Can you su into the root account and run visudo there? On debian visudo is in the sudo package (packages.debian.org/lenny/i386/sudo/filelist) and lives in /usr/sbin/visudo. | |
| Dec 9, 2010 at 8:26 | comment | added | g1t |
Rudi: I looked at that file and it says, I can only modify by doing sudo visudo. However, when I try and execute that : sudo: visudo: command not found. So editing that is something I'm having trouble with. In terms of the git directory structure, do you know why I'm having trouble executing the pull? I mean, the /live/website is a shared repository. I ensured , I made it such by doing git repo-config core.sharedRepository true
|
|
| Dec 9, 2010 at 8:22 | history | answered | Rudi | CC BY-SA 2.5 |