Matthieu Moy <matthieu....@grenoble-inp.fr> writes: > Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> writes: > >> Jordan DE GEA <jordan.de-...@grenoble-inp.org> writes: >> >>> + branch=$(cd short-hand && git rev-parse --symbolic-full-name HEAD) && >>> + test "$branch" = refs/heads/newbranch && >>> + cd .. >> >> If any of the command between "cd short-hand" and "cd .." failed, >> after correcting the broken &&-chain, the next test will end up >> running in short-hand directory, which it is not expecting. A >> canonical way to avoid this problem is to replace the above with: >> >> ... >> git worktree add short-hand - && >> ( >> cd short-hand && >> ... >> test "$branch" = refs/heads/newbranch >> ) > > Actually, $(...) implicitly does a subshell, so the "cd .." was just > useless.
You trimmed my message a bit too aggressively while composing your response, and I think that is what ended up confusing you. Here is what I wrote: | > + cd short-hand && | > + test $(git rev-parse --symbolic-full-name HEAD) = "refs/heads/newbranch" | | Broken &&-chain. | | > + branch=$(cd short-hand && git rev-parse --symbolic-full-name HEAD) && | > + test "$branch" = refs/heads/newbranch && | > + cd .. | | If any of the command between "cd short-hand" and "cd .." failed, | ... The problematic "cd short-hand" is the one a few lines above where you started quoting, not the one you saw in the $(). -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
