From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] t0000 cleanups Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2014 20:04:44 -0500 Message-ID: <20140103010444.GA13018@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <20131228092731.GA26337@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20131228222129.GE5544@google.com> <20131230185125.GI20443@google.com> <20131231103323.GA14823@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20140102222833.GR20443@google.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: Junio C Hamano , git@vger.kernel.org, John Keeping , Thomas Rast To: Jonathan Nieder X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Jan 03 02:04:52 2014 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 1VytBy-0000vR-TQ for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Fri, 03 Jan 2014 02:04:51 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752179AbaACBEr (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Jan 2014 20:04:47 -0500 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([50.56.180.127]:54204 "HELO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1751864AbaACBEq (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Jan 2014 20:04:46 -0500 Received: (qmail 21909 invoked by uid 102); 3 Jan 2014 01:04:46 -0000 Received: from c-71-63-4-13.hsd1.va.comcast.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (71.63.4.13) (smtp-auth username relayok, mechanism cram-md5) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with ESMTPA; Thu, 02 Jan 2014 19:04:46 -0600 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Thu, 02 Jan 2014 20:04:44 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20140102222833.GR20443@google.com> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Thu, Jan 02, 2014 at 02:28:33PM -0800, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > > This is not exactly true. The TEST_OUTPUT_DIRECTORY setting does not > > leak. t0000 sets $TEST_DIRECTORY (which it must, so the sub-scripts can > > find test-lib.sh and friends), and then TEST_OUTPUT_DIRECTORY uses that > > as a default if it is not explicitly set. > > So I should have said something like the following instead: > [...] Yes, looks good to me. -Peff