Eric Sunshine <sunshine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at 10:14 PM brian m. carlson > <sandals@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On 2020-08-06 at 01:05:01, lufia via GitGitGadget wrote: >> > In the not POSIX environment, like Plan 9, sh might not be looked up >> > in the directories named by the $PATH. >> >> I think Git's editor handling assumes that sh is somewhere in the PATH, >> so it might be fine for us to just ask the user to adjust PATH >> appropriately before running make. I don't have a strong preference; if >> this works on a standard Unix machine, which it looks like it should >> (although I haven't tested), I'm fine with it. > > This does, however, have a bit of a chicken-and-egg feel to it. The > results of the "uname_FOO" assignments in config.mak.uname are > consulted later in the file to _assign_ a value to SHELL_PATH on a > number of platforms. So, making the "uname_FOO" assignments themselves > depend upon SHELL_PATH is rather circular and confusing. Is that just being circular and confusing, or does it produce an incorrect result depending on the circumstances? We would end up special casing SHELL_PATH (e.g. exclude it from the variables that are set based on uname), which I would want to avoid, as I would suspect that there will be even more variables that need similar treatment. This does have a bad smell. Even on a not-so-posix Windows, we do not use such a hack.
