From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] bisect: improve output when bad commit is found Date: Wed, 13 May 2015 17:42:29 -0400 Message-ID: <20150513214228.GA17350@peff.net> References: <1431472751-20974-1-git-send-email-tbsaunde@tbsaunde.org> <20150513005432.GF31257@tsaunders-iceball.corp.tor1.mozilla.com> <20150513013637.GB3066@peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: Junio C Hamano , Trevor Saunders , git To: Christian Couder X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed May 13 23:42:42 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 1YseQL-0007a3-8N for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Wed, 13 May 2015 23:42:41 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965424AbbEMVmh (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 May 2015 17:42:37 -0400 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([50.56.180.127]:58230 "HELO cloud.peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S933971AbbEMVmg (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 May 2015 17:42:36 -0400 Received: (qmail 19762 invoked by uid 102); 13 May 2015 21:42:36 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.1) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with SMTP; Wed, 13 May 2015 16:42:36 -0500 Received: (qmail 16914 invoked by uid 107); 13 May 2015 21:42:34 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with SMTP; Wed, 13 May 2015 17:42:34 -0400 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Wed, 13 May 2015 17:42:29 -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 Wed, May 13, 2015 at 11:39:41AM +0200, Christian Couder wrote: > > It is not clear to me that people are actually scripting around the > > output. Between the exit code and the stable output in BISECT_LOG, that > > seems like a much more preferable way for scripted uses to find out what > > happened. > > > > Of course, that is not a guarantee that nobody scraped stderr, but at > > least it makes me feel better that they're Doing It Wrong. :) > > Aren't we sending the "XXXX is the first bad commit" and the diff-tree > to stdout? Good point. I'm much more sympathetic to people scraping stdout than stderr. I do still think we would do better to direct them to more robust formats, though. -Peff