On Tue, May 07, 2019 at 11:42:28AM +0900, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > Making "0" work as "unlimited" might be nice, but xargs doesn't support > > that and I didn't want to make the recipe any more unreadable than it > > already is. > > Sounds good. After reading the log message, I was curious if there > is a mechanism that makes 999 special (like 0 in your hypothetical > "0 means unlimited"), but I guess it is just "any number that is > greater than the number of source files we have will do". Yes, 2^31-1 is probably a better number, but it's harder to write out. :) Here's what a patch might look like to implement "0". By still using xargs in the unlimited code path, it's not too bad. I dunno. --- diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile index daba958b8f..0765a59b7a 100644 --- a/Makefile +++ b/Makefile @@ -2792,7 +2792,12 @@ endif %.cocci.patch: %.cocci $(COCCI_SOURCES) @echo ' ' SPATCH $<; \ - if ! echo $(COCCI_SOURCES) | xargs -n $(SPATCH_BATCH_SIZE) \ + if test $(SPATCH_BATCH_SIZE) = 0; then \ + limit=; \ + else \ + limit='-n $(SPATCH_BATCH_SIZE)'; \ + fi; \ + if ! echo $(COCCI_SOURCES) | xargs $$limit \ $(SPATCH) --sp-file $< $(SPATCH_FLAGS) \ >$@+ 2>$@.log; \ then \ -Peff
