On 2024-06-21 00:35, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Johannes Sixt <j6t@xxxxxxxx> writes:
Am 20.06.24 um 21:04 schrieb Junio C Hamano:
Just in case there is a reason why we should instead silently return
on MinGW, I'll Cc the author of bfdd9ffd, though.
I don't think there is a reason. IIRC, originally on Windows, failing
to
start a pager would still let Git operate normally, just without paged
output. I might have regarded this as better than to fail the
operation.
The "better keep going than to fail" is what Rubén finds worse, so
both sides are quite understandable.
It is unlikely that real-world users are taking advantage of the
fact. If they do not want their invocation of Git command paged,
"GIT_PAGER=cat git foo" is just as easy as "GIT_PAGER=no git foo",
and if it was done by mistake to configure a non-working pager
(e.g., configure core.pager to the program xyzzy and then
uninstalling xyzzy without realizing you still have users), fixing
it would be a one-time operation either way (you update core.pager
or you reinstall xyzzy), so I would say that it is better to make
the failure more stand out.
To me, failing when the configured pager cannot be executed is the
way to go. Basically, if an invalid pager is configured, we're
actually obliged to produce a failure, simply because we have to
follow and apply the configuration strictly. This also applies
to (partially) invalid configurations.
