Re: Re* [PATCH 7/8] ci: run style check on GitHub and GitLab

From: brian m. carlson <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net>
Date: Jul 9, 2024, 00:56 UTC
Message-ID: <ZoyK1iZIRVDKQ4-f@tapette.crustytoothpaste.net>
In-Reply-To: <xmqqwmlvcx9g.fsf_-_@gitster.g>

On 2024-07-08 at 22:52:11, Junio C Hamano wrote:

Show 18 quoted lines

> Subject: [PATCH] ci: unify bash calling convention
> 
> Under ci/ hierarchy, we run scripts under either "sh" (any Bourne
> compatible POSIX shell would work) or specifically "bash" (as they
> require features from bash, e.g., $(parameter/pattern/string}
> expansion).  As we have the CI envionment under our control, we can
> expect that /bin/sh will always be fine to run the scripts that only
> require Bourne, but we may not know where "bash" gets installed
> depending on distros.
> 
> So let's make sure we start these scripts with either one of these:
> 
> 	#!/bin/sh
> 	#!/usr/bin/env bash
> 
> Yes, the latter has to assume that everybody installs "env" at that
> path and not as /bin/env or /usr/local/bin/env, but this currently
> is the best we could do.

This seems sensible. We know that /bin/sh is not POSIX-compatible on some proprietary Unices, but we're not targeting those in CI, and Git for Windows, macOS, and all of the major open-source Linux and BSD distros have /bin/sh as a POSIX-compatible shell.

/usr/bin/env bash is also safer than /bin/bash, because bash is not in /usr/bin on most of the BSDs. Every other project I've seen writes /usr/bin/env, so I think that's a fairly safe assumption most places, and I agree that it's the best we can do.

So I think is the right move.

-- 
brian m. carlson (they/them or he/him)
Toronto, Ontario, CA