On 2024.02.07 12:55, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Josh Steadmon <steadmon@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > When running tests through `test-tool run-command testsuite`, we > > currently hardcode `sh` as the command interpreter. As discussed in [1], > > this is incorrect, and we should be using the shell set in > > TEST_SHELL_PATH instead. > > > > Add a shell_path field in struct testsuite so that we can pass this to > > the task runner callback. If this is non-null, we'll use it as the > > argv[0] of the subprocess. Otherwise, we'll just execute the test > > program directly. > > That sounds nice in theory, but ... > > > When setting up the struct testsuite in testsuite(), use the value > > of TEST_SHELL_PATH if it's set, otherwise default to `sh`. > > ... this done in the testsuite() function, doesn't suite.shell_path > always gets some non-NULL value? Perhaps in a later step we will > add a mechanism to allow suite.shell_path to be NULL when we know > we are running an executable, or something? > > Leaving readers in a bit of suspense may, especially in a series > that is short like this, be a good technique to entice them to keep > reading, perhaps, but anyway, if that is what is intended, a simple > "this feature is not used in this step, but we will take advantage > of it soon in a later step" would be a good idea. Reworded in V3.
