Johannes Sixt wrote: > Am 1/11/2011 8:54, schrieb Jonathan Nieder: >> Perhaps it is also worth explaining the cases where $PWD is needed? >> >> By contrast, when a passing a path to git or constructing a URL, >> use $PWD. > > The first part of the "or" is not true: you can pass the result of $(pwd) > to a command, and it means the same as $PWD; I would even recommend > against $PWD so that a reader does not have to wonder "why pass $PWD, but > check for $(pwd)?" I _think_ that passing $PWD always gives the right result. By contrast, constructions like PATH=$(pwd)/bin:$PATH break iirc. I suspect that the reader will end up wondering "why does this have to be so complicated" no matter what. > The second part I don't know whether it is true: I haven't noticed a > pattern where people did it the wrong way, therefore, I'don't even know > whether $PWD is really *always* required. Do *you* know? 24f1136 is one example. I don't know of any utility that treats file://c:/foo/bar/baz as a URL representing a resource on localhost (and msys bash has no rewriting rule for it), so in that particular case (file://$directory), $PWD really does seem to be always required. >> It makes a difference on Windows, where >> >> - $(pwd) is a Windows-style path such as git might output, and >> - $PWD is a Unix-style path that the shell (MSYS bash) will >> mangle before passing to native apps like git. > > This information is already included by reference to 4114156ae9. ... but if we can summarize it nicely, we can save the reader a step, no? Anyway, what you have already written is useful; clearing up these details would just be icing on the top. -- 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