On Sun, Mar 08, 2009 at 12:45:55PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > If this part from your analysis is true for a shell: > > > eval 'false > > > > ' > > echo status is $? > > > > generates: > > ... > > status is 0 > > I would be very tempted to declare that shell is unfit for any serious > use, not just for test suite. Removing the empty line at the end of a > scriptlet that such a broken shell misinterprets as an empty command > that is equivalent to ":" (or "true") might hide breakages in the test > suite, but > > (1) eval "$string" is used outside of test suite, most notably "am" and > "bisect". I think "am"'s use is safe, but I wouldn't be surprised if > the scriptlet "bisect" internally creates has empty lines if only for > debuggability; and more importantly > > (2) who knows what _other_ things may be broken in such a shell? OK, good points. I was just hoping not to cause people on FreeBSD undue pain. What is the best way to make such a declaration? I can think of: 1. A mention in the release notes. 2. A test in the Makefile similar to the $(:) test. 3. Getting in touch with the freebsd ports maintainer for git and suggesting a dependency on bash (and/or seeing if he wants to push through a fix for /bin/sh). I don't know if the same problem exists on other BSD-influenced systems, or how closely they share the ports collection (it's been quite a while since I've really admin'd a freebsd box). For that matter, I wonder if this is also a problem on OS X. Can somebody with an OS X box try: $ /bin/sh $ eval 'false ' $ echo $? It should print '1'; if it prints '0', the shell is broken. -Peff -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html