From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: Doesn't disambiguate between 'external command failed' and 'command not found' Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2011 13:56:15 -0400 Message-ID: <20110706175615.GA17978@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <1309884564.18513.12.camel@umgah> <4E137701.1020007@elegosoft.com> <20110705231604.GC12085@sigill.intra.peff.net> <7vpqlnmidy.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: Michael Schubert , git@vger.kernel.org, Alex Vandiver To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Jul 06 19:56:24 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QeWKm-0000Dl-E0 for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Wed, 06 Jul 2011 19:56:24 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753218Ab1GFR4T (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Jul 2011 13:56:19 -0400 Received: from 99-108-226-0.lightspeed.iplsin.sbcglobal.net ([99.108.226.0]:46130 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752031Ab1GFR4S (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Jul 2011 13:56:18 -0400 Received: (qmail 23077 invoked by uid 107); 6 Jul 2011 17:56:38 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) (smtp-auth username relayok, mechanism cram-md5) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with ESMTPA; Wed, 06 Jul 2011 13:56:38 -0400 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Wed, 06 Jul 2011 13:56:15 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <7vpqlnmidy.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 10:24:57AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Jeff King writes: > > > I'm not all that happy with the advice, though. It's pretty technical > > and specific. I'm not sure whether it would be helpful to most users or > > not. > > Yeah, Michael's rewording makes it fuzzier by saying "exists, unable to > execute, maybe git-%s is broken?". Yeah, I like his better. > I notice that we do not give the path to the file that implements the > command. Perhaps we should walk the $PATH after we see this failure to > pinpoint which one is to be inspected (I vaguely recall a weatherbaloon > patch to a similar effect)? That would be better still. But I don't know how much effort this is really worth. It is about catching one specific uncommon misconfiguration. If it were part of a more general exec wrapper that gave better output (which I think is the weatherballoon you mean, that you did a month or three ago), I think it might be more worthwhile. But even then, I seem to remember the discussion fizzling out to "is this really that common a problem?" So I'm happy with just taking Michael's patch. -Peff