From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 355311FF40 for ; Tue, 21 Jun 2016 18:39:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753012AbcFUSj1 (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Jun 2016 14:39:27 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com ([64.147.108.70]:55174 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752784AbcFUSj0 convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Jun 2016 14:39:26 -0400 Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2498225C46; Tue, 21 Jun 2016 14:39:25 -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:content-transfer-encoding; s=sasl; bh=xB4bqwszN1oz 8zZdSGTyQguOcqU=; b=algBpkyk0XGUfpy48atKfPtqi33SOrJ9Lo0T/nd2tbyL YbmbQGIwEMyOOzGEuQQtrU48R46ww4MMcXKVDqUYWt0+DBFV81/kFqYjj6wI+KRQ nt7nf9TSho8nBYwAEpPgrZsaLyAb9wKdyGdzeDO4p2eKMJtLXFpnwy1vBBExFx4= 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:content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=sasl; b=YIRmDU CX/u5cS8ZAaK9v1U4HZCL11COLJVLGvsVMsVWNo7+ZmYWff42tXxB+kFNNkGBVfy T4VQPqEoZTP+YoFRkMNeSz2RVJI6aPmooVTgcUMPLF2KGHzILk3/vIz25kT7pNt+ zVy2aVx6O7Df3dVUTyzcthUdSp/aPukOpDqv4= Received: from pb-smtp1.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B3C825C45; Tue, 21 Jun 2016 14:39:25 -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 88C0925C44; Tue, 21 Jun 2016 14:39:24 -0400 (EDT) From: Junio C Hamano To: Armin Kunaschik Cc: Torsten =?utf-8?Q?B=C3=B6gershausen?= , David Aguilar , Matthieu Moy , Git List Subject: Re: [PATCH] t7800 readlink not found References: <20160527041944.GA17438@gmail.com> <574CDA24.1020906@googlemail.com> <574D1BEA.5020409@web.de> Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2016 11:39:22 -0700 In-Reply-To: (Armin Kunaschik's message of "Tue, 21 Jun 2016 16:44:06 +0200") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 7A0E1BA8-37DF-11E6-A9A2-89D312518317-77302942!pb-smtp1.pobox.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Armin Kunaschik writes: > On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 7:51 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> Torsten Bögershausen writes: >> >>>> diff --git a/t/t7800-difftool.sh b/t/t7800-difftool.sh >>>> index 7ce4cd7..905035c 100755 >>>> --- a/t/t7800-difftool.sh >>>> +++ b/t/t7800-difftool.sh >>>> @@ -446,7 +446,7 @@ write_script .git/CHECK_SYMLINKS <<\EOF >>>> for f in file file2 sub/sub >>>> do >>>> echo "$f" >>>> - readlink "$2/$f" >>>> + ls -ld "$2/$f" | sed -e 's/.* -> //' >>>> done >actual >>>> EOF >>>> >>> I don't know how portable #ls -ld" really is. >> >> The parts with mode bits, nlinks, uid, gid, size, and date part do >> have some variations. For example, we have been burned on ACL >> enabled systems having some funny suffix after the usual mode bits >> stuff. >> >> However, as far as this test is concerned, I do not think "how >> portable is the output from ls -ld" is an especially relevant >> question. None of the things we expect early in the output (the >> fields I enumerated in the previous paragraph) would contain " -> ". >> And we know that we do not use a filename that has " -> " (or "->") >> as a substring in our tests. >> >> We don't have to use readlink, even on platforms where we do have >> readlink. Building the conditional to be checked at runtime and >> providing a shell function read_link that uses "ls -ld | sed" or >> "readlink" depending on the runtime check is wasteful. > > Just a short, curious question: Is this patch to be accepted/included some time? > I didn't see it in 2.8.4 nor 2.9.0. Maybe it just fell off the table... Yes, I think this fell off the table as I was waiting for some kind of agreement or counter-proposal, neither of which came and the thread was forgotten. Unless Torsten still has strong objections (or better yet, a better implementation), I am inclined to queue it as-is. Thanks for pinging the thread.