From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] t3404: use configured shell instead of /bin/sh Date: Sat, 23 Feb 2008 17:39:33 -0500 Message-ID: <20080223223933.GA13683@coredump.intra.peff.net> References: <20080220235944.GA6278@coredump.intra.peff.net> <200802232113.40100.johannes.sixt@telecom.at> <7v63wf2yzt.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> <200802232209.41428.johannes.sixt@telecom.at> <20080223211536.GA13280@coredump.intra.peff.net> <7vmypr1gmh.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: Johannes Sixt , git@vger.kernel.org, Whit Armstrong To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sat Feb 23 23:40:13 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1JT32T-0007sR-BY for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Sat, 23 Feb 2008 23:40:13 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754085AbYBWWjh (ORCPT ); Sat, 23 Feb 2008 17:39:37 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754052AbYBWWjh (ORCPT ); Sat, 23 Feb 2008 17:39:37 -0500 Received: from 66-23-211-5.clients.speedfactory.net ([66.23.211.5]:4418 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754026AbYBWWjg (ORCPT ); Sat, 23 Feb 2008 17:39:36 -0500 Received: (qmail 11578 invoked by uid 111); 23 Feb 2008 22:39:34 -0000 Received: from coredump.intra.peff.net (HELO coredump.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.2) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.32) with SMTP; Sat, 23 Feb 2008 17:39:34 -0500 Received: by coredump.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Sat, 23 Feb 2008 17:39:33 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <7vmypr1gmh.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Sat, Feb 23, 2008 at 01:56:38PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > Well, the trap I wanted to avoid is that "/bin/sh" specifically is > > broken. But yes, I think losing the ability to run the tests from the > > commandline is bad. > > We never had it. "make t3404-rebase-interactive" is the way to > do so. Well, that is a surprise to me, since I have been using it for almost two years with no problems. And I know I am not alone because others have posted snippets on the list invoking a test via "sh -x", including both Dscho and you. Is there a good reason not to do so? -Peff