From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from fhigh-b8-smtp.messagingengine.com (fhigh-b8-smtp.messagingengine.com [202.12.124.159]) (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 F27D278F4B for ; Fri, 25 Apr 2025 14:39:40 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=202.12.124.159 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1745591983; cv=none; b=dTfQl7JfVIvlK4wixxIZBHlXJGsG2mtgTFdhWKwQOFcleU+Wc8S7DDNadUIzHKnsZjDmAf24QOdrY25e9DBKxJ0WTrXZrao0UVQ5bILMZYVaP/xRMvzNz1zx+SZhMWx5vLtigklX8a2UZqBbHcw7UQ1KtBDAWW04fd4jMwmVnuU= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1745591983; c=relaxed/simple; bh=t0/j55JittF8rURWUR/X/KIduz6A3mQNXARr8I2B2EA=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=YquVUBjIrIsYIJ0PtpCGi4s/oD1VTFj0imHJeSgGe6Jlcqi8Pfzg6znIz6N+dw/rX2Hf9V2XHkQd8rckGMFVeJvo2nmR4Akhp/6flr8BMiURQdG+q5AeE8xmld25lTGL9l+q/ABwFxEe0auFkyJRAmY7fh50SnSfHorC/zyjIeM= 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 (2048-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b=SaRbbhG1; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b=Vkcq+iug; arc=none smtp.client-ip=202.12.124.159 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 (2048-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b="SaRbbhG1"; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b="Vkcq+iug" Received: from phl-compute-05.internal (phl-compute-05.phl.internal [10.202.2.45]) by mailfhigh.stl.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7E09254026E; Fri, 25 Apr 2025 10:39:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: from phl-frontend-01 ([10.202.2.160]) by phl-compute-05.internal (MEProxy); Fri, 25 Apr 2025 10:39:39 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=cc :cc:content-type:content-type:date:date:from:from:in-reply-to :in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject :subject:to:to; s=fm2; t=1745591979; x=1745678379; bh=RuhHv+m29U NmwbmiW1t58hnWYP3v1BOy1zItdQx4Q2Y=; b=SaRbbhG1Y/1HmonUaJb7eWYn7J MUPJA18O6DG1HJtFSsu7QK3xuR6hcNNgFV0U1Gk6oiCnHpPodnjINIGoi1Y+85Lx jREGiogapsBsqb0NwX1j3P5kBfKwzkhlTm6HtoxcqzuEM0YLAEhDh0NQPVRqIlz4 i1Uh4nRbSXIwWrwWGmYl9cWSqlTkxaO6bRadLnmkeURhCV0oEVJOb5Py1HxLMld+ 30cM4oql81WIr87Xoa0LlTzz8R85PnQxPSqGZfrDfCq+g0bPBOk4yd6fm0+1Fh5/ 7RL9ueBVYRLhTbIbvVd5nsd/wb1D7zIElxuKfbin+Z6CGTzWG1FXRZZAl4Ow== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-type:content-type:date:date :feedback-id:feedback-id:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject:subject:to :to:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; t= 1745591979; x=1745678379; bh=RuhHv+m29UNmwbmiW1t58hnWYP3v1BOy1zI tdQx4Q2Y=; b=Vkcq+iugOAgyTjTmzPWirxwWhPinpVy1xgWZft0D5//kvNt7Grw 37QekhJtcCxF0ZfKAkdSYkyD8Av1ELS8dnRLhOt3IKQQ0xEsf+/PoeFvdTuddRGx BV1GKyn8VV8cppU+Of+n6teCCZF732vMrWteJpHFGAtTmDhU3f5PTt38uipVrZoT 1bhqD1+OkWrecm+GHzZHtCstiPVesWxKd2Kv6O6YSLDCb5hgwAVcILPHt38FJ/NE BNqjv7Zudt/EICZDddfbRBD173pLTKJ5p+H4GkcBLQHsLTx4FN8TYg9aptdsK4Fx J0LtHE/FygI885QgD7msVj/uZIMVp1s1XJw== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeefvddrtddtgddvhedviedtucetufdoteggodetrf dotffvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdggtfgfnhhsuhgsshgtrhhisggv pdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgenuceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpih gvnhhtshculddquddttddmnecujfgurhephffvvefujghffffkfgggtgesthdtredttder tdenucfhrhhomheplfhunhhiohcuvecujfgrmhgrnhhouceoghhithhsthgvrhesphhosg hogidrtghomheqnecuggftrfgrthhtvghrnhepfeevteetjeehueegffelvdetieevffeu feejleeuffetiefggfeftdfhfeeigeeinecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrg hrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepghhithhsthgvrhesphhosghogidrtghomhdpnhgspghr tghpthhtohepfedpmhhouggvpehsmhhtphhouhhtpdhrtghpthhtohepphhssehpkhhsrd himhdprhgtphhtthhopehgihhtsehvghgvrhdrkhgvrhhnvghlrdhorhhgpdhrtghpthht ohepghhithhsthgvrhesphhosghogidrtghomh X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: if26b431b:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Fri, 25 Apr 2025 10:39:39 -0400 (EDT) From: Junio C Hamano To: Patrick Steinhardt Cc: git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] ci: skip unavailable external software In-Reply-To: (Patrick Steinhardt's message of "Fri, 25 Apr 2025 12:02:25 +0200") References: Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2025 07:39:37 -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 Patrick Steinhardt writes: > But shouldn't the failing wget cause an error, too? So the `|| { }` > cleanup branch would execute in that case and we can prune the empty > file there. So in other words, shouldn't the following work alright? > > if wget --output-document=... > then > massage output > else > rm output > fi > > Or am I still missing the obvious? While the above "works", what is "obvious" is that it is way too verbose and the merit of going verbose is dubious, especially given that the reason that trigger the argument to favor the above construct over the more concise wget && massage || rm is "massage part should never fail". We do want to notice a failure in something, if that something is what should never fail, don't we? Not necessarily so! Our CI jobs are not in the business of checking and ensuring wget or chmod keeps working. If either of them fail, the more important part is its practical impact to the rest of the CI job---resulting "jgit" file is harmful to be left on disk and needs to be removed. Another to think about this is to imagine if we are having this conversation, had "wget" had (just like its --output-document argument) a "--chmod" argument. (wget && massage) as a unit is conceptually a single "download the jgit binary" in this case, and if either of them fail, we failed to download it. So, yes, either would "work", but I do not think longhand is warranted in this case.