From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] tests: make test_must_fail fail on missing commands Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2010 13:25:28 -0400 Message-ID: <20100831172528.GA15020@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <20100831155457.GB11014@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20100831155652.GB11530@sigill.intra.peff.net> <7v7hj6d8im.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: Jon Seymour , git@vger.kernel.org To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Aug 31 19:25:33 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OqUaN-000215-I1 for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Tue, 31 Aug 2010 19:25:27 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753129Ab0HaRZM (ORCPT ); Tue, 31 Aug 2010 13:25:12 -0400 Received: from xen6.gtisc.gatech.edu ([143.215.130.70]:43012 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750909Ab0HaRZM (ORCPT ); Tue, 31 Aug 2010 13:25:12 -0400 Received: (qmail 29183 invoked by uid 111); 31 Aug 2010 17:25:10 -0000 Received: from 99-108-226-0.lightspeed.iplsin.sbcglobal.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (99.108.226.0) (smtp-auth username relayok, mechanism cram-md5) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.40) with ESMTPA; Tue, 31 Aug 2010 17:25:10 +0000 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Tue, 31 Aug 2010 13:25:28 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <7v7hj6d8im.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 09:58:09AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > + elif test $exit_code = 127; then > > + echo >&2 "test_must_fail: command not found: $*" > > + return 1 > > fi > > Hmm. One worry is that if we ever exit(127) ourselves this would be > confused, but hopefully we are not that clueless. Yeah, I considered that but dismissed it. I don't think we are that clueless, and even if we were, then I think test_must_fail is doing a good thing by pointing it out to us. -Peff