From: D. Ben Knoble <ben.knoble@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2025 20:27:51 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH] t7500: fix tests with absolute path following ":(optional)" on Windows
Message-ID: <CALnO6CCfDy19J-DTT4Vjp9EYf6M8sk5DpMjsm-Mp4_kNO9=kdg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CALnO6CBwn-NP-ZdoaeOD37_VM8N4D-KKopm3nnf4a9b+9OiizA@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Oct 20, 2025 at 4:27 PM D. Ben Knoble <ben.knoble@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Oct 20, 2025 at 1:32 PM Johannes Sixt <j6t@kdbg.org> wrote:
> >
> > Am 20.10.25 um 15:43 schrieb Ben Knoble:
> > > Going forward I will probably stick with using pwd, given the
> > > difference in platform behavior.
> > $(pwd) is usually safe, but not always. If we have to look at every
> > instance anyway, we can use $PWD for efficiency if it does not matter,
> > and $(pwd) only when it is necessary.
> >
> > > Is there a doc or test lint for that? If not, might be useful.
> >
> > If this were documented somewhere, would you have found it and obeyed
> > the recommendations?
>
> Likely yes, but I'll admit to being the exception rather than the rule
> (I like to read). A lint is more valuable in that it can at least be
> run rather than searched for.

Ach, and yet… I clearly didn't ;) hence the lint

-- 
D. Ben Knoble