fc407f9 (Add new simplified git-remote-testgit, 2012-11-28) introduced a
test which was meant to skip the test unless the test shell is bash.
Unfortunately, it tests for the availability of bash only. But users can
opt to use a different shell (using SHELL_PATH) for the tests even though
bash is av
Am 4/25/2013 12:09, schrieb Michael J Gruber:
> fc407f9 (Add new simplified git-remote-testgit, 2012-11-28) introduced a
> test which was meant to skip the test unless the test shell is bash.
> Unfortunately, it tests for the availability of bash only. But users can
> opt to use a different shell (
Johannes Sixt venit, vidit, dixit 25.04.2013 12:59:
> Am 4/25/2013 12:09, schrieb Michael J Gruber:
>> fc407f9 (Add new simplified git-remote-testgit, 2012-11-28) introduced a
>> test which was meant to skip the test unless the test shell is bash.
>> Unfortunately, it tests for the availability of
Am 4/25/2013 13:21, schrieb Michael J Gruber:
> Johannes Sixt venit, vidit, dixit 25.04.2013 12:59:
>> Am 4/25/2013 12:09, schrieb Michael J Gruber:
>>> fc407f9 (Add new simplified git-remote-testgit, 2012-11-28) introduced a
>>> test which was meant to skip the test unless the test shell is bash.
On 25.04.13 12:09, Michael J Gruber wrote:
> fc407f9 (Add new simplified git-remote-testgit, 2012-11-28) introduced a
> test which was meant to skip the test unless the test shell is bash.
> Unfortunately, it tests for the availability of bash only. But users can
> opt to use a different shell (usi
Michael J Gruber writes:
> fc407f9 (Add new simplified git-remote-testgit, 2012-11-28) introduced a
> test which was meant to skip the test unless the test shell is bash.
> Unfortunately, it tests for the availability of bash only.
True.
> But users can
> opt to use a different shell (using SHE
Johannes Sixt writes:
> Am 4/25/2013 12:09, schrieb Michael J Gruber:
>> fc407f9 (Add new simplified git-remote-testgit, 2012-11-28) introduced a
>> test which was meant to skip the test unless the test shell is bash.
>> Unfortunately, it tests for the availability of bash only. But users can
>>
Torsten Bögershausen writes:
> Could we use the same logic as in t9903:
> ...
> . ./lib-bash.sh
Please no. The test itself is not about something that checks how
we behave under bash (which is what 9903 wants to see). The use of
construct that is portable in t5801 is a pure and simple bug, and
Junio C Hamano writes:
> Michael J Gruber writes:
>
>> fc407f9 (Add new simplified git-remote-testgit, 2012-11-28) introduced a
>> test which was meant to skip the test unless the test shell is bash.
>> Unfortunately, it tests for the availability of bash only.
>
> True.
>
>> But users can
>> op
Junio C Hamano venit, vidit, dixit 25.04.2013 19:12:
> Junio C Hamano writes:
>
>> Michael J Gruber writes:
>>
>>> fc407f9 (Add new simplified git-remote-testgit, 2012-11-28) introduced a
>>> test which was meant to skip the test unless the test shell is bash.
>>> Unfortunately, it tests for the
Michael J Gruber writes:
>> It is a separate issue to port git-remote-testgit to POSIX (J6t
>> already has a two part draft), move it to git-remote-testgit.sh, and
>> get its shebang line preprocessed like all other shell scripts. I
>> think it is worth doing.
>>
>> Takers?
By the way, this hi
11 matches
Mail list logo
