From: Josh Triplett <josh@freedesktop.org>
Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2007 03:22:24 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] filter-branch: fail gracefully when a filter fails
Message-ID: <468DB570.1090900@freedesktop.org>
In-Reply-To: <20070705135824.GB5493@sigill.intra.peff.net>

Jeff King wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 04, 2007 at 03:36:01PM +0100, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> 
>> 	It is slightly ugly that the output of msg-filter is written
>> 	to a temporary file. But I do not know a better method to
>> 	catch a failing msg-filter. Help?
> 
> If you mean, in general, to catch the exit code of the first part of a
> pipe, you have to do something like this:
> 
> status=`((cmd1; echo $? >&3) | cmd2) 3>&1`
> 
> which is pretty ugly in itself, and if you want the stdout of cmd2, then
> you have to add even more redirection. I'm not sure it's worth it.

bash has "set -o pipefail", but that would require bash.  However, you could
try setting pipefail, and ignoring any failure to set it; that would give the
more friendly behavior with bash, while still allowing any /bin/sh in general.

- Josh Triplett