From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: [PATCH v2 0/7] introduce capture_command to avoid deadlocks Date: Sun, 22 Mar 2015 23:53:02 -0400 Message-ID: <20150323035302.GA30279@peff.net> References: <20150322095924.GA24651@peff.net> <20150322100724.GC11615@peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: Eric Sunshine , Wincent Colaiuta , Git List To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Mar 23 04:53:13 2015 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 1YZtQO-0004NV-Gn for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Mon, 23 Mar 2015 04:53:12 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752021AbbCWDxH (ORCPT ); Sun, 22 Mar 2015 23:53:07 -0400 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([50.56.180.127]:36996 "HELO cloud.peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1751985AbbCWDxG (ORCPT ); Sun, 22 Mar 2015 23:53:06 -0400 Received: (qmail 14506 invoked by uid 102); 23 Mar 2015 03:53:05 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.1) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with SMTP; Sun, 22 Mar 2015 22:53:05 -0500 Received: (qmail 12158 invoked by uid 107); 23 Mar 2015 03:53:18 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with SMTP; Sun, 22 Mar 2015 23:53:18 -0400 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Sun, 22 Mar 2015 23:53:02 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Sun, Mar 22, 2015 at 04:40:37PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Now I read the callers, it does look like this new function better > fits in the run-command suite, essentially allowing us to do what we > would do with $(cmd) or `cmd` in shell and Perl scripts, even though > I do not particularly agree with the phrase "layering violation" to > call its current placement. I was on the fence, and you both seem to prefer it in run-command, so here is a re-roll in that direction (no other changes). [1/7]: wt-status: don't flush before running "submodule status" [2/7]: wt_status: fix signedness mismatch in strbuf_read call [3/7]: run-command: introduce capture_command helper [4/7]: wt-status: use capture_command [5/7]: submodule: use capture_command [6/7]: trailer: use capture_command [7/7]: run-command: forbid using run_command with piped output -Peff