From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] Remember and use GIT_EXEC_PATH on exec()'s Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 16:57:06 -0800 Message-ID: <7v8xtn4m59.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> References: <1136849678.11717.514.camel@brick.watson.ibm.com> <1136849810.11717.518.camel@brick.watson.ibm.com> <7vwth8bxqd.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <1136900174.11717.537.camel@brick.watson.ibm.com> <43C3CC4A.4030805@op5.se> <1136910406.11717.579.camel@brick.watson.ibm.com> <7vzmm36f1x.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <1136925066.11717.605.camel@brick.watson.ibm.com> <43C44CF2.5050808@op5.se> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Jan 11 01:57:21 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EwUIb-0004JX-Ix for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Wed, 11 Jan 2006 01:57:13 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932355AbWAKA5K (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Jan 2006 19:57:10 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932553AbWAKA5K (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Jan 2006 19:57:10 -0500 Received: from fed1rmmtao11.cox.net ([68.230.241.28]:12208 "EHLO fed1rmmtao11.cox.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932355AbWAKA5J (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Jan 2006 19:57:09 -0500 Received: from assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net ([68.4.9.127]) by fed1rmmtao11.cox.net (InterMail vM.6.01.05.02 201-2131-123-102-20050715) with ESMTP id <20060111005600.HDGX6244.fed1rmmtao11.cox.net@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>; Tue, 10 Jan 2006 19:56:00 -0500 To: Andreas Ericsson In-Reply-To: <43C44CF2.5050808@op5.se> (Andreas Ericsson's message of "Wed, 11 Jan 2006 01:10:26 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110004 (No Gnus v0.4) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Andreas Ericsson writes: > Johannes Schindelin wrote: >> Wouldn't it make much more sense to have a switch in the Makefile, >> which says *if* we have a libexec/ directory? > > No, it wouldn't, because then we can't use a different release of the > git-tools without re-compiling the potty. True, but *please* stop calling "git wrapper" a potty. It gives me an impression that it is not connected to the plumbing. I do not do Porcelain, but I do not do plastics nor glass either ;-). Thanks.