From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
To: Sebastian Schuberth <sschuberth@gmail.com>
Cc: "David Aguilar" <davvid@gmail.com>,
"Phil Susi" <phillsusi@gmail.com>,
"Git Mailing List" <git@vger.kernel.org>,
"Philip Oakley" <philipoakley@iee.org>,
"Johannes Schindelin" <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>,
"SZEDER Gábor" <szeder@ira.uka.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 2/2] mergetools: add winmerge as a builtin tool
Date: Wed, 20 May 2015 14:00:11 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <xmqq8ucjm0bo.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHGBnuPyhG4y5ooR7KH0KrEhRYFu9BB+HKnnn+XhU5xL2TnL=w@mail.gmail.com> (Sebastian Schuberth's message of "Wed, 20 May 2015 22:20:09 +0200")
Sebastian Schuberth <sschuberth@gmail.com> writes:
> On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 10:13 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
>
>> David Aguilar <davvid@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> + for directory in $(env | grep -Ei '^PROGRAM(FILES(\(X86\))?|W6432)=' |
>>> + cut -d '=' -f 2- | sort -u)
>>
>> Is the final "sort" really desired? I am wondering if there are
>> fixed precedence/preference order among variants of %PROGRAMFILES%
>> environment variables that the users on the platform are expected
>> to stick to, but the "sort" is sorting by the absolute pathnames of
>> where these things are, which may not reflect that order.
>
> I did add the sort (and -u) by intention, to ensure that "C:\Program
> Files" (which is what %PROGRAMFILES% expands to by default) comes
> before "C:\Program Files (x86)" (which is what %PROGRAMFILES(X86)%
> expands to by default), so that programs of the OS-native bitness are
> preferred.
Yuck. So even though %PROGRAMFILES% and %PROGRAMFILES(X86)% look as
if they are variables that can point at arbitrary places, they in
reality don't? Otherwise %PROGRAMFILES% may point at D:\Program
while %PROGRAMFILES(X86)% may piont at C:\X86 and the latter would
sort before the former, which would defeat that "logic".
But of course if I view this not as a "logic" but as a "heuristics"
that happens to do the right thing in common environments, it is
perfectly OK ;-).
I've queued the patches as-is.
Thanks.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-05-20 21:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-05-20 9:07 [PATCH v6 1/2] mergetool--lib: set IFS for difftool and mergetool David Aguilar
2015-05-20 9:07 ` [PATCH v6 2/2] mergetools: add winmerge as a builtin tool David Aguilar
2015-05-20 11:09 ` SZEDER Gábor
2015-05-22 19:58 ` David Aguilar
2015-05-22 20:05 ` Junio C Hamano
2015-05-22 20:16 ` David Aguilar
2015-05-20 20:13 ` Junio C Hamano
2015-05-20 20:20 ` Sebastian Schuberth
2015-05-20 21:00 ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2015-05-20 21:20 ` Sebastian Schuberth
2015-05-21 10:06 ` Johannes Schindelin
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=xmqq8ucjm0bo.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com \
--to=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=davvid@gmail.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=johannes.schindelin@gmx.de \
--cc=philipoakley@iee.org \
--cc=phillsusi@gmail.com \
--cc=sschuberth@gmail.com \
--cc=szeder@ira.uka.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.