Re: [PATCHv6 16/16] Introduce portable_unset and use it to ensure proper && chaining

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Junio C Hamano wrote:

> Hmm, the pros and cons between allowing test_might_fail on normal commands
> vs introducing cmd_might_fail are questionable, though.  I cannot think of
> a case where we would want to tolerate death by signal or segv on non git
> commands

Okay, makes sense.  I would be happier if exit statuses 129 and 129-256
were disallowed by test_must_fail, too, but that does not make it any
less useful for cases like "test_might_fail grep needle haystack >result".
And it is better to avoid introducing yet another command to learn.
--
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


[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]