Hi Junio, Junio C Hamano wrote: > "Ramkumar Ramachandra" <r@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > # on coq.git, for those curious > > $ git bisect start > > $ git bisect bad @ > > $ git bisect good V8.14.1 > > $ git bisect run bisect.sh # oops! > > Lancement de 'bisect.sh' > > 'bisect.sh': bisect.sh: command not found > > La base de fusion ea3595845f5013359b2ba4402f948e454350a74c est mauvaise. > > ... > > "command not found"? Yeah, I suppose bisect invokes exec(), which then probably expects the executable to either be in $PATH, or expects me to specify the path of the executable, failing that; in other words, './bisect.sh'. In any case, this minor typo shouldn't penalize the user by having to abort the bisect, and restart it, specifying good and bad commits all over again. Then again, there are other ways to bump your head: what if I forgot to chmod +x the bisect.sh? What if there is no bisect.sh? Should I have to restart the bisect process from the beginning? This presents another possible opportunity for enhancement: in an overwhelmingly large majority of the use cases (or so I assume), './' is really redundant. Warm regards, Ram
