Re: [PATCH v2 28/34] run_command_opt(): optionally hide stderr when the command succeeds

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

 



Am 14.12.2016 um 14:06 schrieb Jeff King:
On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 07:53:23AM -0500, Jeff King wrote:

On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 09:34:20AM +0100, Johannes Sixt wrote:

I wanted to see what it would look like if we make it the caller's
responsibility to throw away stderr. The patch is below, as fixup
of patch 29/34. The change is gross, but the end result is not that
bad, though not really a delightful read, either, mostly due to the
strange cleanup semantics of the start_command/finish_command combo,
so... I dunno.

The cleanup semantics of start_command and finish_command are not that strange as I thought first. I just hadn't looked well enough.


I don't have a strong opinion on the patches under discussion, but here
are a few pointers on the run-command interface:
[...]
>
And here is a patch representing my suggestions, on top of yours. Not
tested beyond "make test".

Thank you, that looks way better.

If there is agreement that this approach is preferable, I think we can have patches on top of the series; they would be orthogonal and do not have to take hostage of it. (And it looks like I won't be able to follow up until later this week[end].)

-- Hannes




[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]