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=-3.9 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,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 191A71F4B4 for ; Sun, 11 Apr 2021 20:33:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S236547AbhDKUda (ORCPT ); Sun, 11 Apr 2021 16:33:30 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com ([64.147.108.70]:50549 "EHLO pb-smtp1.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S235486AbhDKUda (ORCPT ); Sun, 11 Apr 2021 16:33:30 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38E64CB59C; Sun, 11 Apr 2021 16:33:13 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) 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=J655TNNb+3JHDWOHFeE5hWcuNqM=; b=dP+JkU mgQG3X672CRb2ZZD9IaVf0CjVjwaaQyHu8KRghBZLGeaIv9E1B05lwA8codvKY4J 6x5cj92rnINyvdh+SnuC54bxHnLD2O0Gjhm50i6MvF4emdOUidkp3bt8Nuv/h3/q 35jgZgG9LVp0FFyazHNAEsLO5YkYBkd40dnJk= 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=SjEk+bxXLy6TzfF/StP3Jn8rsIqI/Fq3 rLKf+XYe8BChcpVVoF/vEYwtNI1QGTfHAYzNgkQa2jZQRjRpJu8IdusRgzc/qrs9 n6CBIbhDpJSyzljY+G9mb615Q1XB8GayWw2the00SPN9cO193OwWhl2JjXjECwes hwaKWIgdfmo= Received: from pb-smtp1.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F5EACB59B; Sun, 11 Apr 2021 16:33:13 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [35.243.138.161]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A9837CB59A; Sun, 11 Apr 2021 16:33:12 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Miriam Rubio Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Tanushree Tumane , Christian Couder Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/4] bisect--helper: reimplement `bisect_run` shell function in C References: <20210411095538.34129-1-mirucam@gmail.com> <20210411095538.34129-4-mirucam@gmail.com> Date: Sun, 11 Apr 2021 13:33:12 -0700 In-Reply-To: (Junio C. Hamano's message of "Sun, 11 Apr 2021 13:31:12 -0700") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 22DEFBDE-9B05-11EB-A666-D152C8D8090B-77302942!pb-smtp1.pobox.com Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Junio C Hamano writes: > Miriam Rubio writes: > >> + if (res < 0 || 128 <= res) { >> + error(_("bisect run failed: exit code %d from" >> + " '%s' is < 0 or >= 128"), res, command.buf); > > Good now. Oh, while asking for better test coverage, it is somewhat surprising that the broken error condition check in v2 was never noticed. Can we add a test for this, too? Thanks.