Re: [PATCH] t9100: fix breakage when SHELL_PATH is not /bin/sh

[Jeff King <peff@peff.net>]

On Mon, Feb 08, 2016 at 05:27:30PM +0100, Michael J Gruber wrote:

> > I think this just re-breaks things on Windows. That first setup test
> > used "chmod +x" (which is brought back by your patch), without having
> > the POSIXPERM prerequisite.
> >
> > We probably do not want to mark the whole setup test as POSIXPERM, as
> > that would effectively break all of the other tests on Windows. The rest
> > of the tests need to be able to work whether or not the "chmod +x" was
> > run. It may be simpler to just break the executable-bit tests, including
> > setup, out to their own section of the script.
> >
> The commit message does not explain that part of the patch at all - to me
> it looks as if the direct "echo" and "chmod +x" is simply replaced
> by calling a function which does just that, or more exactly, not quite:

Ah, right. I figured that systems that don't handle `chmod +x` would
omit it from write_script(). But it looks like we don't. I guess the
logic is that on Windows "chmod +x" doesn't _complain_, it's simply a
noop for adding the file to the index (because we unset core.filemode).

So in that sense, Windows is fine with that setup either way.

I wondered why it would not later fail the same sha1 check, since "git
add" would not respect the executable bit on such a system. But the
answer is that we do not "git add" the result; we import it using svn,
and then convert that to a git tree.

> > That being said, t9100 seems to pass for me, even at bcb11f1. Can you
> > show us the breakage you are seeing?
> 
> SHELL_PATH=/bin/dash (in config.mak)
> 
> As I explained in my commit message, the problem arises when SHELL_PATH is
> not "/bin/sh" and, consequently,
> the generated "exec.sh" results in a blob with a different sha1.

Oh, of course. I forgot that my SHELL_PATH is in fact /bin/sh. Sorry for
being thick.

Assuming your patch works on Windows (and from the logic above, I think
it should be the case?), then I think it's a good solution.

-Peff