Re-allow .install files containing '..' - #7008
Conversation
2b45fe6 to
a4744db
Compare
rjbou
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Even if it wasn't enforced in the code, from the manual, .. are forbidden in .install target.
My opinion: I'm in favor or removing it (keep as is), especially as there is now a field that permit to no longer need them (#6938). For backward compatibility, we can reintroduce it, but discourage its use with a warning (that errors on strict mode). We can even think about removing the support in a few releases (we need then to give the information from now on release blog posts).
|
Per #7009 (comment), that backward compatibility is required for 2.6 at least (then we can bring back the stricter rule in 2.7) |
dd2ecf4 to
85706ef
Compare
rjbou
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I've update the code :
- rebased
- rebase on top of 7015
- added a warning (error on strict mode) for
..in target - added a test with strict mode to highlight the error
…tination filepath trying to escape their scope
|
Ignoring the missing macOS runs. Seems like GitHub have nuked their macOS machines out of existence |
Partially reverts ae877c0 (from #6879)
This check is no longer necessary since d7f7d8e (#7005) and broke opam repositories providing cross-compiled packages as such format is used by
dune(see ocaml/dune#14393)See https://ocaml.zulipchat.com/#narrow/channel/527832-opam/topic/Cross.20compilation.20with.20opam.202.2E5.2E1/with/592359165
Backported to 2.5 in #7009