From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.9 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 750F920450 for ; Wed, 1 Nov 2017 05:03:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750990AbdKAE6O (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Nov 2017 00:58:14 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com ([64.147.108.70]:57897 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750716AbdKAE6O (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Nov 2017 00:58:14 -0400 Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6AF42BB4F8; Wed, 1 Nov 2017 00:58:13 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=VR66hMw15lkgEBE0YaUS2ZAaj1c=; b=Fy148c 7KM7wrg4wMM674GScDBNFx74ynvDGsCPO/1eKU16qOcks3Ere6DJuhWV0vTu6l2/ 2crp+zfz4yp0YzzGwX7jzjKRp8uDC9BgIuH/eMw6G0Q6Fp9LoOvFXZ7ikbLhzSDf b+5EFiYTUbtZK4UQ6moCX/gssR0jfO4aX3pho= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=wMIJ7T2cWxUd1Qqw7JgCC/tReOYD1iqx 5R2iAGBS3DXFhfKKNRAzSwO78iVwaM7hNKPM/i185zZkRUrW7wevmc3R3oHe66/K 1tGosvpCF/KmmQz/1BZKg09Zd5p6VX22vQ4Qk/9fRsZb78iPiRF9O97btnapOPeA XCEXlFsJFv4= Received: from pb-smtp1.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63D94BB4F7; Wed, 1 Nov 2017 00:58:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [104.132.0.95]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D39B6BB4F6; Wed, 1 Nov 2017 00:58:12 -0400 (EDT) From: Junio C Hamano To: Johannes Schindelin Cc: Eric Sunshine , Git List Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] mingw: document the experimental standard handle redirection References: <436f0fb010709fe0d90460dc7bc1b3482237b192.1509382976.git.johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2017 13:58:11 +0900 In-Reply-To: (Johannes Schindelin's message of "Tue, 31 Oct 2017 18:08:57 +0100 (CET)") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.2.50 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 4384A448-BEC1-11E7-9001-8EF31968708C-77302942!pb-smtp1.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Johannes Schindelin writes: >> > +Two special values are supported: `off` will simply close the >> > +corresponding standard handle, and if `GIT_REDIRECT_STDERR` is >> > +`2>&1`, standard error will be redirected to the same handle as >> > +standard output. >> >> Consistent with the Unixy special-case for '2>&1', I wonder if the >> 'off' case would be more intuitively stated as '>/dev/null' or just >> '/dev/null'... > > I feel this is the wrong way round. `>/dev/null` may sound very intuitive > to you, but this feature is Windows only. Guess three times how intuitive > it sounds to Windows developers to write `>/dev/null` if you want to > suppress output... It would be just as intuitive to write '2>&1' for dup-redirection, so I tend to agree with both of you in that perhaps '2>&1' may have to become less Unix-y (or more Windows-y) to make these special cases more consistent. Perhaps "dup-to-stdout" or even just "stdout". Side note: if we really wanted to go in the other direction Eric suggests, "off" probably should be spelled as ">&-" ;-) By the way, the description talks about "special values", but it leaves it completely unclear what their normal values mean. Are they filenames, or integers that denote file descriptors, or something else? To those who read, wrote, or reviewed the code in these patches, the answer is obvious (and I do *not* want you to give your answer to *me* in your response for that reason). But we'd want to give the answer to future readers by clarifying this documentation.