From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCH] documentation: Makefile accounts for SHELL_PATH setting Date: Sun, 12 Apr 2009 01:28:45 -0700 Message-ID: <7vzlem9sxu.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <1237728044-15651-1-git-send-email-bwalton@artsci.utoronto.ca> <20090410093430.6117@nanako3.lavabit.com> <7vmyamdirk.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> <1239500938-sup-5545@ntdws12.chass.utoronto.ca> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: GIT List To: Ben Walton X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sun Apr 12 10:30:38 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 1Lsv5F-0004MU-Qv for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Sun, 12 Apr 2009 10:30:34 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756805AbZDLI3A (ORCPT ); Sun, 12 Apr 2009 04:29:00 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1756343AbZDLI3A (ORCPT ); Sun, 12 Apr 2009 04:29:00 -0400 Received: from a-sasl-fastnet.sasl.smtp.pobox.com ([207.106.133.19]:47386 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755673AbZDLI26 (ORCPT ); Sun, 12 Apr 2009 04:28:58 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-sasl-fastnet.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A21D3A95DB; Sun, 12 Apr 2009 04:28:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [68.225.240.211]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a-sasl-fastnet.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A7EBEA95DA; Sun, 12 Apr 2009 04:28:54 -0400 (EDT) User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: F77CDD5C-273B-11DE-8C9A-C121C5FC92D5-77302942!a-sasl-fastnet.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Ben Walton writes: > Excerpts from Junio C Hamano's message of Sat Apr 11 16:42:39 -0400 2009: >> There was a discussion going that eventurally petered out without seeing >> success (or breakage) reports from people with various platforms. > > I didn't see that part of the discussion. Were there breakage > reports? I'm willing to make any required corrections to the patch > such that it gets included (then I could drop it locally). I do not recall breakage reports nor success reports. At least it does not seem to break things for me, but I do not do anything so...