From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 04/14] Add new simplified git-remote-testgit Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2012 10:00:17 -0400 Message-ID: <20121102140017.GA12040@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <1351821738-17526-1-git-send-email-felipe.contreras@gmail.com> <1351821738-17526-5-git-send-email-felipe.contreras@gmail.com> <5093D0DD.3050801@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: Felipe Contreras , git@vger.kernel.org, Junio C Hamano , Johannes Schindelin , Elijah Newren , Ilari Liusvaara , Sverre Rabbelier To: Stefano Lattarini X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Nov 02 15:00:40 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1TUHnZ-0006TY-08 for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Fri, 02 Nov 2012 15:00:37 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933527Ab2KBOAW (ORCPT ); Fri, 2 Nov 2012 10:00:22 -0400 Received: from 75-15-5-89.uvs.iplsin.sbcglobal.net ([75.15.5.89]:54491 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752209Ab2KBOAU (ORCPT ); Fri, 2 Nov 2012 10:00:20 -0400 Received: (qmail 4773 invoked by uid 107); 2 Nov 2012 14:01:03 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) (smtp-auth username relayok, mechanism cram-md5) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with ESMTPA; Fri, 02 Nov 2012 10:01:03 -0400 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Fri, 02 Nov 2012 10:00:17 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5093D0DD.3050801@gmail.com> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Fri, Nov 02, 2012 at 02:55:41PM +0100, Stefano Lattarini wrote: > > --- /dev/null > > +++ b/git-remote-testgit > > @@ -0,0 +1,62 @@ > > +#!/bin/bash > > > I think git can't assume the existence of bash unconditionally, neither > in its scripts, nor in its tests (the exception being the tests on > bash completion, of course). This script probably need to be re-written > to be a valid POSIX shell script. No, we can't assume bash. But this is replacing a script written in python, which we also can't assume. So if it were optional, and skipped gracefully when bash was not available, that would be OK. Of course if it could be done in portable bourne shell, that would be even better (I haven't looked closely, but your comments all seem reasonable). -Peff