Re: 1.7.2 cycle will open soon
- From
Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
- Date
- May 6, 2010, 06:44 UTC
- Message-ID
- <20100506064428.GA29360@progeny.tock>
- In-Reply-To
- <20100506055236.GA16151@coredump.intra.peff.net>
Jeff King wrote:
> FreeBSD's /bin/sh doesn't propagate $? over an eval
Thanks for tracking it down.
Show 18 quoted lines
> Looking at that patch, I don't see any reason that eval_ret needs to be
> set inside the eval. If we have multiple test_when_finished calls, we
> keep setting and propagating eval_ret, which doesn't make much sense to
> me. Why not just:
>
> test_run_ () {
> test_cleanup=
> eval >&3 2>&4 "$1"
> eval_ret=$?
> eval >&3 2>&4 "$test_cleanup"
> return 0
> }
>
> test_when_finished () {
> test_cleanup="$*; $test_cleanup"
> }
>
> Am I missing something?If cleanup fails, I want to catch it. Would something like this do?
test_run_ () {
test_cleanup=:
eval >&3 2>&4 "$1"
eval_ret=$?
eval >&3 2>&4 "$test_cleanup" && (exit "$eval_ret")
eval_ret=$?
return 0
} test_when_finished () {
test_cleanup="$* && $test_cleanup"
}To permit a line break at the end of a cleanup command, one can do
test_when_finished () {
test_cleanup="{ $*
} && $test_cleanup"
}but that might not be worth the ugliness.
Jonathan