On Mon, Jan 04, 2010 at 05:35:07PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > 1. My patch "t0021:..." contains an unrelated change to t4030 (it > > changes a /bin/sh to $SHELL_PATH) that is not necessary. I included it > > in my first version of the patch, but later noticed that we already > > have many similar uses of /bin/sh instead of $SHELL_PATH in test > > scriptlets and decided to remove the change, but I only changed the > > commit message and forgot to unstage t4030. > > While you are technically correct that the change you made in t4030 is not > justified by the commit log message in the sense that the "hexdump" script > will go through run_command() interface and is not subject to the special > rules filter writers need to keep in mind, the patch text itself is a good > change, isn't it? Do you want me to split the commit into two (one with > the current message with a patch only to t0021, and another to t4030 with > a justification like "SHELL_PATH is what the user told us to use")? If we are going to do the t4030 change, there are a ton of other spots that use /bin/sh directly (I counted 38 with grep -n /bin/sh * | grep -v :1: ). Should we be changing all of them? It is slightly just code churn, because the scripts are so simple that even broken shells like Solaris /bin/sh run them just fine. The only real advantage is that it slightly future-proofs them against somebody making them more complex. -Peff -- 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