Hi Peff (and other interested parties), On Mon, 8 Feb 2016, Jeff King wrote: > On Mon, Feb 08, 2016 at 11:43:19AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > > The version in 'master' that does > > > > echo "#!/bin/sh" >exec.sh && > > chmod +x exec.sh && > > > > should be equivalent, so dropping that hunk from the patch is the > > right resolution perhaps? > > Yeah, but I still don't understand why the original did not work on > Windows, once all the other hunks from bcb11f1 are applied. And indeed it passes. With MSYS2. Because it simply ignores that chmod +x cannot flip an executable bit. The original patch (the one that guarded the chmod behind the MINGW prereq) originated in the MSys (AKA MSys1) times, where 1) chmod would fail, and 2) POSIXPERM did not yet exist. Besides, I am pretty certain that there is a test in t9100 that *does* test the executable bit, properly requiring POSIXPERM. So I still would be in favor of using write_script: 1) our *intention* is to write a script, even if we do not currently execute it, and 2) if anybody is interested in supporting MSys1 (*cough* Hannes & Sebastian *cough*), they have a *much* easier time to fix it. Ciao, Dscho -- 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