Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes: > On Sun, Jun 23, 2019 at 01:32:16PM -0700, Pedro Larroy wrote: > >> Thanks for your answer. >> >> I was expecting the HEAD to point to the first bad commit. >> >> In mercurial, the exit status tells you information about the >> bisection process: https://www.mercurial-scm.org/repo/hg/help/bisect >> >> Sure one can parse stdout, it's just more tedious than just checking >> the return code and having the HEAD left to the original bad commit. > > I think it might be nice for Git to write a well-known refname (like > BISECT_RESULT or similar) so that you can refer to that instead of > having to read stdout (whether by machine or by a user > cutting-and-pasting). And I cannot offhand think of a particular reason > why that could not just be HEAD (instead of something bisect-specific) > after the bisect finishes. As Christian downthread reminds us, that is what the bisect/bad ref is (which I totally forgot when I gave the earlier response). I do not think we need a new ref, but I do not think it is so bad to add an option "git bisect --exit-code ( --good | --bad ) [<commit-ish>]" that makes the command usually exit with non-zero status. Unless we have found the final answer successfully, that is, and in that case the command would exit with 0 status to signall "all done". But that should be an option.
