Matthew Ogilvie <mmogilvi_git@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> diff --git a/wrap-for-bin.sh b/wrap-for-bin.sh
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..ee2bc98
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/wrap-for-bin.sh
> @@ -0,0 +1,15 @@
> +#!/bin/sh
> +
> +# wrap-for-bin.sh: Template for git executable wrapper scripts
> +# to run test suite against sandbox, but with only bindir-installed
> +# executables in PATH. The Makefile copies this into various
> +# files in bin-wrappers, substituting
> +# __GIT_EXEC_PATH__ and __PROG__.
> +
> +GIT_EXEC_PATH="__GIT_EXEC_PATH__"
> +GIT_TEMPLATE_DIR="__GIT_EXEC_PATH__/templates/blt"
> +GITPERLLIB="__GIT_EXEC_PATH__/perl/blib/lib"
> +PATH="__GIT_EXEC_PATH__/bin-wrappers:$PATH"
> +export GIT_EXEC_PATH GIT_TEMPLATE_DIR GITPERLLIB PATH
> +
> +exec "${GIT_EXEC_PATH}/__PROG__" "$@"
Two issues, one minor and one not so minor but not grave:
- Everywhere else we seem to use "@@UPPERCASE_NAME@@" not
double-underscore as placeholders like the above.
- @@PROG@@ is under our control and it is easy for us to guarantee that
it won't have any funny letters, but GIT_EXEC_PATH is not. Is it safe
to do a simple-minded "sed" replacement, or does it need the usual sq
trick employed in the other replacement in our Makefile?
--
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