Re: [PATCH] Do not fail test if '.' is part of $PATH

2018-12-02 Thread Junio C Hamano
"H.Merijn Brand" writes: > When $PATH contains the current directory as .:PATH, PATH:., PATH:.:PATH, > or (maybe worse) as :PATH, PATH:, or PATH::PATH - as an empty entry is > identical to having dot in $PATH - this test used to fail It is totally unclear what "this test" refers to. Let's retit

Re: [PATCH] Do not fail test if '.' is part of $PATH

2018-12-02 Thread Junio C Hamano
Jeff King writes: > Since the test is ultimately checking "can we run should-not-run from > the current directory", might it be simpler to actually try that as the > precondition? I.e., something like: > ... A nice egg of columbus. It also would save us from mischievous users who have should-no

Re: [PATCH] Do not fail test if '.' is part of $PATH

2018-12-01 Thread Jeff King
On Sat, Dec 01, 2018 at 06:07:57PM +0100, H.Merijn Brand wrote: > When $PATH contains the current directory as .:PATH, PATH:., PATH:.:PATH, > or (maybe worse) as :PATH, PATH:, or PATH::PATH - as an empty entry is > identical to having dot in $PATH - this test used to fail Good catch. The test car

[PATCH] Do not fail test if '.' is part of $PATH

2018-12-01 Thread H.Merijn Brand
When $PATH contains the current directory as .:PATH, PATH:., PATH:.:PATH, or (maybe worse) as :PATH, PATH:, or PATH::PATH - as an empty entry is identical to having dot in $PATH - this test used to fail This patch was tested with PATH=$PATH, PATH=.:$PATH, PATH=$PATH:., PATH=$PATH:.:/bin, PATH=:$PA