From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS53758 23.128.96.0/24 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 357151F5AE for ; Wed, 5 May 2021 17:46:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S235275AbhEERrT (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 May 2021 13:47:19 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:53848 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S236929AbhEERqE (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 May 2021 13:46:04 -0400 Received: from mail-ot1-x32d.google.com (mail-ot1-x32d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::32d]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DBA62C04BE71 for ; Wed, 5 May 2021 10:18:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ot1-x32d.google.com with SMTP id 65-20020a9d03470000b02902808b4aec6dso2368675otv.6 for ; Wed, 05 May 2021 10:18:41 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=date:from:to:cc:message-id:in-reply-to:references:subject :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=stiai7EFDoD7en4k1rQnDPMu9lfupbUPmr0jaSO3Bnk=; b=lmTUOHAEjB2KHaMSMYL77LwHk7oEQXPL4ALZOac4XbpJVRMoAcoM76+43zUhARCMic 94kBcYfL3H1L4DzP5PPYTx6tMGfSj944+q4+yBtqqpBmzFkDvDiQrXGIpRfNuXuf6/hJ FwtJzuY8tuP9pnzLq//JLlq2Yy609rioq6HMEoQYs5jFMm1cj39phqvVUJSu6ag4mCBz NAzr7IwCv/X1Jl8zaEUsESoHVh9up6uv8SPzRA7ELZS0aLB0qHtaIhcK9koG30Y2Yy4Q eGEQ2xAl9NP7Vr6iVvfNTq/2yVhcYynF4DSHi2bgLOYNpqxk6TNAbpsSED/S+G/R39jV 5mmA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:message-id:in-reply-to :references:subject:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=stiai7EFDoD7en4k1rQnDPMu9lfupbUPmr0jaSO3Bnk=; b=ZPUlCGHMlGI7g5y2Xtz63+PPotBZkOE1rjYvtmoo7YlQxvpfdpeWQ8XnW92Nl9jnGk ivDcMqYzsl3COIt+X++/QH0oD1MYVmgHbJgNIiMG3JIEB/twsni7gS+seao0ILQRMGaJ n2+RJhFH0R5w1bHcQV0aARWvhgioS7Kxp3f6UvvDPcDn7Xyh/V8sbNZk+2qVGXw0gsMl Xhnm/y18F9FAIor7EUqcuExIsnH+rY2zQccPRyKhg8lKXo6oOo0rtcYoMt7jiS0SfoYb XzXdRAF8ETfIMZG5VFdgGuCbNptCosxiLqKYo/xPrGqqHHc5rrqHlBzBICJgSk1/o2DS jpyw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533l45sptfoZr48zjgNGMfSaCBgqCOAa9T9vWsjKiiusCUYkm0SR ty969Gn8vvIQfky0RCdboWXP7OnyPLlBfQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyPvXlrnETbvIEeP+Y+sfEKE2BjYIeFR8B+yfpMsyWAIk1lez9JxbIik1i5ORX1RElb6+vuig== X-Received: by 2002:a9d:4617:: with SMTP id y23mr14321071ote.71.1620235121159; Wed, 05 May 2021 10:18:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (fixed-187-190-78-172.totalplay.net. [187.190.78.172]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id m13sm5169otp.71.2021.05.05.10.18.40 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 05 May 2021 10:18:40 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 05 May 2021 12:18:36 -0500 From: Felipe Contreras To: Jeff King , Felipe Contreras Cc: "brian m. carlson" , =?UTF-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsCBCamFybWFzb24=?= , Junio C Hamano , Git List , Eric Sunshine Message-ID: <6092d36c6d1a8_1d245208a4@natae.notmuch> In-Reply-To: References: <877dkgxk9p.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com> <87czu6wuf3.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com> <87a6pawmyu.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com> <6091e1f12ddf9_cc8208b9@natae.notmuch> <6092180651fdc_105ac2088a@natae.notmuch> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] CodingGuidelines: explicitly allow "local" for test scripts Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Jeff King wrote: > On Tue, May 04, 2021 at 10:59:02PM -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote: > > Indeed. But it also probably doesn't meet many other needs. A quick > > check shows 54 failed tests just on t0000-basic.sh. I don't think it's > > something we should even consider. > > Yeah, we have visited this off and on over the years (links below). > There are some modernized ksh variants that work OK (like mksh), but I > think we've declared ksh93 as not worth it. Just to clarify what was said on that thread: ksh93 is not a version. There is at least ksh93u+ and ksh93v-, which are *completely* different. -- Felipe Contreras