Re: [msysGit] [PATCH bc/connect-plink] t5601-clone: remove broken and pointless check for plink.exe

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

 



On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 6:56 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Eric Sunshine <sunshine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
>> On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 4:51 PM, Johannes Sixt <j6t@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> Invoking plink requires special treatment, and we have support and even
>>> test cases for the commands 'plink' and 'tortoiseplink'. We also support
>>> .exe variants for these two and there is a test for 'plink.exe'.
>>>
>>> On Windows, however, where support for plink.exe would be relevant, the
>>> test case fails because it is not possible to execute a file with a .exe
>>> extension that is actually not a binary executable---it is a shell
>>> script in our test. We have to disable the test case on Windows.
>>>
>>> Considering, that 'plink.exe' is irrelevant on non-Windows, let's just
>>> remove the test and assume that the code "just works".
>>
>> putty and plink are used on Unix as well. A quick check of Mac OS X,
>> Linux, and FreeBSD reveals that package managers on each platform have
>> putty and plink packages available.
>
> But they do not force their users to say "plink.exe", but instead
> let them invoke "plink", no?
>
> The test before the one that was removed is about "plink" (sans .exe),
> and what was removed is with ".exe", so I think J6t's patch is OK.

Ah, you're correct. I overlooked the extra emphasis j6t's commit
message placed on ".exe".
--
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]