From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jay Soffian Subject: Re: [PATCH] builtin-remote: better handling of multiple remote HEADs Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2009 21:58:48 -0500 Message-ID: <76718490902151858j78c0d06bxa659ffd3bd2dad01@mail.gmail.com> References: <20090214034345.GB24545@coredump.intra.peff.net> <1234607430-5403-1-git-send-email-jaysoffian@gmail.com> <20090215052740.GA11522@coredump.intra.peff.net> <76718490902150613i79517e6dwcec8e1e40c56bcc8@mail.gmail.com> <7v7i3rglza.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Jeff King , git@vger.kernel.org, barkalow@iabervon.org To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Feb 16 04:00:23 2009 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 1LYtiU-00028e-WE for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2009 04:00:19 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755690AbZBPC6v (ORCPT ); Sun, 15 Feb 2009 21:58:51 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755565AbZBPC6v (ORCPT ); Sun, 15 Feb 2009 21:58:51 -0500 Received: from rv-out-0506.google.com ([209.85.198.235]:43843 "EHLO rv-out-0506.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755413AbZBPC6t (ORCPT ); Sun, 15 Feb 2009 21:58:49 -0500 Received: by rv-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id g37so1372305rvb.1 for ; Sun, 15 Feb 2009 18:58:48 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=AC27CyGqeVg+dIZq0GRFqvAqugPi6CeQZ0GEdeXgQTs=; b=VMrQgdPealGL8Wll6a8cFf0FEFizMR7UoT6tqoo4PSODaLJySZa292ieTtPheYdAg3 yMMxYW2fdniRjzBCwyjTeGlk66i7Hxdf/SODBY27f+7Andpbtsvt7yC+3+2qPkg9JM5D /xoYfeL3bNi9KvJVipPwzbRYS8IReRCTI2iJQ= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=d7J7FRAK8pSPHq7HBj4C5yaKbK9IOQt+1WFuxf0XAgLEHkSRlxOuDt1rpPyu+lN9vj 5rDHP/IF8W1CVlbl2QuFP1WVD8gHH1GyJjUPSbPIK51JT4QDsI7VOuAWaIdXxYLEp+qg wunGY9KbhmfVZcR8Q0Nt4o8t5ILnGSERhMGSQ= Received: by 10.141.176.6 with SMTP id d6mr2436024rvp.233.1234753128786; Sun, 15 Feb 2009 18:58:48 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <7v7i3rglza.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Sun, Feb 15, 2009 at 9:21 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> &>word >> >&word > Just to clarify, the above is not a recommendation for shell scripts in > git project. Indeed not! My use of it wasn't even intentional, I was a tcsh (cringe...) user for a long time and I only finally switched to bash about a year ago. It must've been muscle memory that made me type it, but a pox on bash for not rejecting it outright -- the bash man page claims posix'ish compliance when invoked as /bin/sh, so I don't know why it allows such syntax in its posix'ish mode. > By the say, does anybody know why bash people recommend &>word form? > > Neither &>word nor >&word to send both stderr and stdout to the file is > from true Bourne, but at least the use of >&word form for this purpose is > more familiar to people who are used to Csh. it is exactly because it is familiar to csh people that they recommend the opposite j.