Re: git rebase regression: cannot pass a shell expression directly to --exec
- From
Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
- Date
- May 16, 2017, 17:37 UTC
- Message-ID
- <20170516173727.5zstcg2g5bradhcf@sigill.intra.peff.net>
- In-Reply-To
- <CA+zRj8XLQiTmiVbsJZ7XjdW4bQvMSJpCtKW8xx5JvMKOhBDmLQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 10:21:51AM -0700, Eric Rannaud wrote:
Show 12 quoted lines
> On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 9:59 AM, Eric Rannaud <eric.rannaud@gmail.com> wrote:
> > When I use "git rebase --exec <cmd>" I'm basically writing a "foreach
> > commit in range { <cmd> }" in my shell. Same idea with git bisect run.
> >
> > A transparent optimization that tries execve() then falls back to the
> > user's shell sounds like a good idea.
>
> One issue with the execve-else-shell optimization is that sometimes a
> binary exists that will shadow an exported function or a shell
> builtin:
>
> git rebase --exec true master^^ # OK but in fact this runs /usr/bin/trueYeah, this is the builtin thing I mentioned elsewhere. I think it's pretty rare to run a builtin with no arguments and care about the behavior differences.
Show 8 quoted lines
> /usr/bin/time requires an argument. Even though the bash builtin time > runs fine without argument. > > $ time > > real 0m0.000s > user 0m0.000s > sys 0m0.000s
I've run into the "time" distinction even when running things from the shell, because the time builtin is special. E.g.:
$ time true real 0m0.000s user 0m0.000s sys 0m0.000s
$ (echo foo | time true) 2>&1 0.00user 0.00system 0:00.00elapsed 0%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 1136maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+61minor)pagefaults 0swaps
So to some degree, depending on builtins versus external commands (especially when you're round-tripping through another program running a second shell) is going to have some surprises.
> But if the optimization is applied to more complex commands, then we > will have problems. For instance, the builtin echo supports \E, but > /usr/bin/echo doesn't support it.
No, it shouldn't. If any of
|&;<>()$`\\\"' \t\n*?[#~=%
appear in the string, we always run the shell.
> In any case, the manpage says --exec <cmd> and "<cmd> will be > interpreted as one or more shell commands.", it doesn't say "--exec > <executable>".
Right, it's clearly supposed to use the shell, or behave as if the shell were invoked (within reason).
-Peff