From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Johannes Sixt Subject: Re: [PATCH] use only the PATH for exec'ing git commands Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2007 08:14:43 +0200 Message-ID: <471D9153.30109@viscovery.net> References: <1193091122.v2.fusewebmail-240137@f> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Alex Riesen , git@vger.kernel.org To: srp@srparish.net X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Oct 23 08:15:00 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1IkD2Z-00055S-Jq for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Tue, 23 Oct 2007 08:15:00 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752255AbXJWGOs (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Oct 2007 02:14:48 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752297AbXJWGOs (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Oct 2007 02:14:48 -0400 Received: from lilzmailso01.liwest.at ([212.33.55.23]:30878 "EHLO lilzmailso01.liwest.at" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752191AbXJWGOr (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Oct 2007 02:14:47 -0400 Received: from cm56-163-160.liwest.at ([86.56.163.160] helo=linz.eudaptics.com) by lilzmailso01.liwest.at with esmtpa (Exim 4.66) (envelope-from ) id 1IkD23-0002Eu-UP; Tue, 23 Oct 2007 08:14:28 +0200 Received: from [192.168.1.42] (J6T.linz.viscovery [192.168.1.42]) by linz.eudaptics.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC6126C4; Tue, 23 Oct 2007 08:14:43 +0200 (CEST) User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728) In-Reply-To: <1193091122.v2.fusewebmail-240137@f> X-Spam-Score: 1.7 (+) X-Spam-Report: ALL_TRUSTED=-1.8, BAYES_99=3.5 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Scott R Parish schrieb: >> Alex Riesen, Mon, Oct 22, 2007 12:01 >> Scott R Parish, Mon, Oct 22, 2007 19:01:48 +0200: >>> + strbuf_addch(out, ':'); >> Shouldn't it break MingW32 native port? > > What can i do here to better accommodate MingW32? You're > right, just because the original code did it this way > isn't a good excuse for me not to do it better. Don't bother with it right now. GIT currently does not have MinGW specific code, yet. -- Hannes