From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCHv3] git-fetch: Split fetch and merge logic Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2007 01:30:19 -0800 Message-ID: <7vd53zzyvo.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> References: <87wt29i7hg.fsf@gmail.com> <7vabz56vyq.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <8aa486160702230242r4059811ewbc4cb5c6d33500df@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: "Junio C Hamano" , "Git Mailing List" To: =?utf-8?Q?Santi_B=C3=A9jar?= X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sat Feb 24 10:30:38 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1HKtEh-000272-69 for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Sat, 24 Feb 2007 10:30:35 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933459AbXBXJaY convert rfc822-to-quoted-printable (ORCPT ); Sat, 24 Feb 2007 04:30:24 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S933458AbXBXJaX (ORCPT ); Sat, 24 Feb 2007 04:30:23 -0500 Received: from fed1rmmtao107.cox.net ([68.230.241.39]:35445 "EHLO fed1rmmtao107.cox.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933460AbXBXJaU convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Sat, 24 Feb 2007 04:30:20 -0500 Received: from fed1rmimpo01.cox.net ([70.169.32.71]) by fed1rmmtao107.cox.net (InterMail vM.7.05.02.00 201-2174-114-20060621) with ESMTP id <20070224093020.YTWI2394.fed1rmmtao107.cox.net@fed1rmimpo01.cox.net>; Sat, 24 Feb 2007 04:30:20 -0500 Received: from assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net ([68.5.247.80]) by fed1rmimpo01.cox.net with bizsmtp id TMWK1W0091kojtg0000000; Sat, 24 Feb 2007 04:30:20 -0500 User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: "Santi B=C3=A9jar" writes: > On 2/23/07, Junio C Hamano wrote: > >> I am wondering if FETCH_FETCHED is purely for internal use by >> git-fetch (it appears so), and if so if it is worth trying to do >> without the temporary file, but that is a minor detail. > > Yes, it's purely internal. With "without the temporary file" you mean > to put the content in a variable or removing at the end? If a variable suffices that would be quite nice, but it is not a big deal. As the script does fair amount of computation in subprocess, I suspect it may not be worth trying to use variable, only to get rid of the temporary file. >> I appreciate the cleverness of the intersection. However, is >> "echo -e" portable? I think we have avoided it so far (we have >> avoided even "echo -n" which is traditionally much more >> available). > > printf '%s\n%s' "$merge_branches" "$fetch_branches" > > is OK? Yes. I think printf is what people who rewrote my "echo -n" have done elsewhere.