On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 07:02:48PM +0100, Johannes Sixt wrote:
Am 31.10.2012 03:28, schrieb Felipe Contreras:
On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 3:13 AM, Jonathan Nieder jrnie...@gmail.com wrote:
Felipe Contreras wrote:
It's all fun and games to write explanations for things, but it's not
that
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 2:17 PM, Jeff King p...@peff.net wrote:
On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 07:02:48PM +0100, Johannes Sixt wrote:
Am 31.10.2012 03:28, schrieb Felipe Contreras:
On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 3:13 AM, Jonathan Nieder jrnie...@gmail.com
wrote:
Felipe Contreras wrote:
It's all fun
On Fri, Nov 02, 2012 at 04:17:27PM +0100, Felipe Contreras wrote:
And me, who is trying to figure out what to do with this patch. It is
presented on its own, outside of a series, with only the description no
reason not to do this.
Yeah, because I think it stands on its own. But I'll
On 10/30/2012 11:17 PM, Elia Pinto wrote:
Thanks. I know that posix support these usages, but exists some
traditional shell that not support it.
True, but those shells are not POSIX shells -- the major example that
comes to mind is the accursed Solaris /bin/sh.
Since Git assumes a POSIX shell
Am 31.10.2012 03:28, schrieb Felipe Contreras:
On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 3:13 AM, Jonathan Nieder jrnie...@gmail.com wrote:
Felipe Contreras wrote:
It's all fun and games to write explanations for things, but it's not
that easy when you want those explanations to be actually true, and
On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 7:02 PM, Johannes Sixt j...@kdbg.org wrote:
Am 31.10.2012 03:28, schrieb Felipe Contreras:
Yeah, that would be nice. Too bad I don't have that information, and
have _zero_ motivation to go and get it for you.
Just to clarify: That information is not just for Jonathan,
The shell word splitting done in base is a bashism, iow not portable.
Best
2012/10/30, Felipe Contreras felipe.contre...@gmail.com:
No reason to use the full path in case this is used externally.
Signed-off-by: Felipe Contreras felipe.contre...@gmail.com
---
t/test-lib.sh | 3 ++-
1 file
Elia Pinto wrote:
The shell word splitting done in base is a bashism, iow not portable.
No, ${varname##glob} is in POSIX and we already use it here and there.
See Documentation/CodingGuidelines:
- We use ${parameter#word} and its [#%] siblings, and their
doubled longest matching form.
Thanks. I know that posix support these usages, but exists some
traditional shell that not support it. These are described in the
autoconf manual, last time i have checked. As the construct ; export
var = x should be portable, but it is not. If this is important these
days i don't know.
Best
Felipe Contreras wrote:
On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 5:46 AM, Jonathan Nieder jrnie...@gmail.com wrote:
Felipe Contreras wrote:
No reason to use the full path in case this is used externally.
Signed-off-by: Felipe Contreras felipe.contre...@gmail.com
No reason not to is not a reason to do
On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 2:27 AM, Jonathan Nieder jrnie...@gmail.com wrote:
Felipe Contreras wrote:
On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 5:46 AM, Jonathan Nieder jrnie...@gmail.com wrote:
Felipe Contreras wrote:
No reason to use the full path in case this is used externally.
Signed-off-by: Felipe
Felipe Contreras wrote:
It's all fun and games to write explanations for things, but it's not
that easy when you want those explanations to be actually true, and
corrent--you have to spend time to make sure of that.
That's why it's useful for the patch submitter to write them, asking
for help
On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 3:13 AM, Jonathan Nieder jrnie...@gmail.com wrote:
Felipe Contreras wrote:
It's all fun and games to write explanations for things, but it's not
that easy when you want those explanations to be actually true, and
corrent--you have to spend time to make sure of that.
No reason to use the full path in case this is used externally.
Signed-off-by: Felipe Contreras felipe.contre...@gmail.com
---
t/test-lib.sh | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/t/test-lib.sh b/t/test-lib.sh
index 514282c..5a3d665 100644
--- a/t/test-lib.sh
+++
On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 05:12:57AM +0100, Felipe Contreras wrote:
No reason to use the full path in case this is used externally.
I think it is not just no reason to, but it is actively wrong to use a
full path, as we do not take care to mkdir -p the intervening path
components.
However, this
On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 5:28 AM, Jeff King p...@peff.net wrote:
On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 05:12:57AM +0100, Felipe Contreras wrote:
No reason to use the full path in case this is used externally.
I think it is not just no reason to, but it is actively wrong to use a
full path, as we do not
Hi,
Felipe Contreras wrote:
No reason to use the full path in case this is used externally.
Signed-off-by: Felipe Contreras felipe.contre...@gmail.com
No reason not to is not a reason to do anything. What symptoms does
this prevent? Could you describe the benefit of this patch in a
17 matches
Mail list logo
