Antony Stubbs <antony.stubbs@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> On 21/07/2009, at 3:34 AM, Jeff King wrote:
> ...
>> But I guess the plan was softened, and we have no deprecation plan for
>> dashed forms in exec-path. So maybe my thinking was outdated.
>>
>>> So the preferred fix might be just the matter of adding one line
>>>
>>> $ENV{'PATH'} = `git --exec-path`. ":$ENV{'PATH'}";
>>>
>>> at the beginning of the script.
>>
>> I can see that for a totally third-party script which wanted to use
>> git
>> plumbing. But why do that for a git-* script? The "git" wrapper
>> sets up
>> the environment like that already.
>>
>> -Peff
[note: do not top post]
> But regardless, surely calling straight into git is simpler/nicer and
> more likely to just work (as on OSX)?
>
> From the 1.6.0 release notes
> (http://www.kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/RelNotes-1.6.0.txt ):
> """With the default Makefile settings, most of the programs are now
> installed outside your $PATH, except for "git", "gitk" and some server
> side programs that need to be accessible for technical reasons.
> Invoking a git subcommand as "git-xyzzy" from the command line has
> been deprecated since early 2006 (and officially announced in 1.5.4
> release notes); use of them from your scripts after adding output from
> "git --exec-path" to the $PATH is still supported in this release, but
> users are again strongly encouraged to adjust their scripts to use
> "git xyzzy" form, as we will stop installing "git-xyzzy" hardlinks for
> built-in commands in later releases. """
In case you are too new to the git land, I'd point out that "... as we
will stop installing" part was rescinded after a big fiasco that
immediately followed 1.6.0 release.
> note the "but users are again strongly encouraged to adjust their
> scripts to use "git xyzzy" form". Why not just apply the patch and be
> done with it?
Note that my suggestion on $PATH=$(git --exec-path):$PATH was a response
to Jeff's message, which was the same message your patch was response to.
In other words, our messages crossed, and I do not have an issue with
fixing this either way. If your patch fixes the issue correctly that
would be great.
Has anybody reviewed the submitted patch? I do not use cvsimport these
days anymore for anything real, so the only assurance I have on your patch
so far are my eyeballs and whatever tests done in test scripts in the t/
directory. Independent "Yeah, it looks good and it works for me" would
make me feel a bit safer.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html