Re: t6044 broken on pu

["Torsten Bögershausen" <tboegi@web.de>]

On 08.05.16 04:21, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Torsten Bögershausen <tboegi@web.de> writes:
>
>> That's true, but the test passes anyway.
> You can also remove the body of the test and replace it with "true"
> and say "the test passes anyway".  Changing the test to use a file
> with only one line is irresponsible, if you do not know the nature
> of expected future bug that requires 10 lines to be there to
> manifest that the test wants to try.
>
> test_seq was invented exactly for the purpose of accomodating
> platforms that lack seq, so using it would probably be the best
> first step.  Updating implementation of test_seq to avoid $PERL
> would be a separate step, if desired (I personally do not think
> that is worth it).
We don't need to invoke perl, when the shell can do that internally ?

May a  simple
 printf "1\n2\n3\n4\n5\n6\n7\n8\n9\n10\n"

be an option ?