Re: [PATCH v2] ci: fail the build if perforce, git-lfs, or JGit fail to install

[Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im>]

On Mon, Oct 26, 2026 at 09:41:45AM +0200, Harald Nordgren wrote:
> > > >               wget --quiet \
> > > >                    "$LFSWHENCE/git-lfs-linux-amd64-$LINUX_GIT_LFS_VERSION.tar.gz" &&
> > > >               tar -xzf "git-lfs-linux-amd64-$LINUX_GIT_LFS_VERSION.tar.gz" \
> > > >                       -C "$CUSTOM_PATH" --strip-components=1 \
> > > >                       "git-lfs-$LINUX_GIT_LFS_VERSION/git-lfs" &&
> > > > -             rm "git-lfs-linux-amd64-$LINUX_GIT_LFS_VERSION.tar.gz" ||
> > > > -             rm -f "$CUSTOM_PATH/git-lfs"
> > > > +             rm "git-lfs-linux-amd64-$LINUX_GIT_LFS_VERSION.tar.gz" || {
> > > > +                     echo >&2 "error: could not install git-lfs"
> > > > +                     exit 1
> > > > +             }
> > >
> > > This could all be a bit less convoluted if we had `set -e` in
> > > "ci/lib.sh". But that certainly is outside the scope of this patch
> > > series, so meanwhile this looks good to me.
> >
> > Yeah, `set -e` is a gem of a command. Would be good to do later!
> 
> But wait, we already have it in "ci/lib.sh"!

Oh, I missed that!

The question then becomes whether the error message is worth it. In case
we see traces (`set -x`) I think it's somewhat pointless as you'd
trivially see the last failing command anyway, so you'd know why it has
failed.

Anyway, this is all a bit of a tangent, I don't think there's a strong
reason that this really must change.

Patrick