From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com (pb-smtp1.pobox.com [64.147.108.70]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 90967A48 for ; Tue, 23 Jul 2024 02:31:07 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=64.147.108.70 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1721701869; cv=none; b=q1ko71dxREBIwum2Mn0Y1ODPFRkQEr/e+jWdrWrVdbiEsbA9n5vsihwgCul+Pjr93atYxzj4Lrb+fPWVbSu5Ui6DuvsOgURzIvzsbIo3bM6H4oEnIeMVzG5IgyQ3kTooiC9GE8Kwh80zFppvMF2V8xt3VLftZoELTNLhE7NSLvQ= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1721701869; c=relaxed/simple; bh=3/iNAl439s3W9EEerauOs/FU0DKOSIPpv3hFDvfIroU=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=dh3hvXjEhp+zmpqI28Aidvg0DZRxU3a9WGiYX2AtOehDqVn3hit4LHt4imZWg3G94rtfg1QYCyCK2Fah+/8Mdhaxapw+zS26YgOdtfOA3D4YicV7lruhcovrF94VWUDUv5Ph/R2ZQZUDhMRGS1er8UzxW+O7K71QT3r4F1RG48U= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=pobox.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pobox.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b=i7ZSc9PK; arc=none smtp.client-ip=64.147.108.70 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=pobox.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pobox.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b="i7ZSc9PK" Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5568725A03; Mon, 22 Jul 2024 22:31:06 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=3/iNAl439s3W9EEerauOs/FU0DKOSIPpv3hFDv fIroU=; b=i7ZSc9PKNuBGBPgBFEQwqTgVGn7rEUaRbWS+HCxs4B1J7bhn1ejE/z Ib1EoFihGysLs0zCx0CQfMeZdeHtQdVEqnOblWB4dC4UnO1nL9M+mKHUbYDNZ6QQ 0CNjcYqlvCmVd8JAFo6WVdtcll4FgcnKweyNwsq6RIenhIdreO3Mc= Received: from pb-smtp1.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C1D625A02; Mon, 22 Jul 2024 22:31:06 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.125.139.61]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9D4B925A01; Mon, 22 Jul 2024 22:31:05 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Kyle Lippincott Cc: =?utf-8?Q?Rub=C3=A9n?= Justo , phillip.wood@dunelm.org.uk, Git List , Dragan Simic , Jeff King Subject: Re: Re* [PATCH v3 4/4] add-patch: render hunks through the pager In-Reply-To: (Kyle Lippincott's message of "Mon, 22 Jul 2024 16:12:21 -0700") References: <2653fb37-c8a8-49b1-a804-4be6654a2cad@gmail.com> <1dc9ebad-768b-4c1a-8a58-8a7a5d24d49e@gmail.com> <2b57479c-29c8-4a6e-b7b0-1309395cfbd9@gmail.com> <88f9256e-04ba-4799-8048-406863054106@gmail.com> <079901fe-7889-4e1f-bb91-610e1eae25d3@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2024 19:31:04 -0700 Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 9C9FC966-489B-11EF-AF54-34EEED2EC81B-77302942!pb-smtp1.pobox.com Kyle Lippincott writes: > I was also able to reproduce both aspects of this behavior (doesn't > export, value is retained) with ksh (sh (AT&T Research) 93u+m/1.0.8 > 2024-01-01), which is the current version on debian testing. So maybe > "some versions of ksh (tested: 93u+m/1.0.8 2024-01-01) and dash > (0.5.10.2-6)"? Or maybe we move the 'some versions' around, because I > think it's probably all versions of ksh :) Makes sense, but I think "POSIX guarantees that the behaviour is something you should not rely on by telling us that these are unspecified", which you found, is a much better rationale to explicitly forbid "VAR=VAL shell_func" construct. Besides, as another thread recently discussed, our test scripts, with really heavy uses of "local", do not work at all with AT&T ksh (other ksh clones are reported to be OK, though). So it may be OK to write it off as "unusuable to run our tests", at least for now.