From: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2012 15:18:27 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] fetch: Use the remote's ref name to decide how to describe new refs.
Message-ID: <20120417151826.GA21534@burratino>
In-Reply-To: <4F8D7CD5.3080508@xiplink.com>

Hi again,

Marc Branchaud wrote:

> Jonathan, I figured regexps aren't an issue with plain "grep" (unlike "egrep"
> or "grep -e").  I take it this is a portability concern -- are there systems
> that actually replace plain "grep" like a "egrep"?

No, "grep" always means to globally match against a regexp and print.
There is an "fgrep" command to search for a fixed string, but why not
take advantage of regexps while they're available and use one grep
instead of two?

> Also, in my test's pipes I believe only the second "grep" needs to be
> "test_i18ngrep", right?  (Only strings like "[new branch]" are
> internationalized.)

I'm not sure what the point would be.  The exit status from the
upstream of a pipe doesn't affect the outcome of the test, so no one
would be able to tell the difference.

[...]
> Thanks guys!

Thank you.

Sincerely,
Jonathan