Re: [PATCH/RFC] git-am: Make it easier to see which patch failed

From: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Date: Jan 18, 2009, 16:17 UTC
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.1.00.0901181711090.3586@pacific.mpi-cbg.de>
In-Reply-To: <20090118153928.GA16664@coredump.intra.peff.net>

Hi,

On Sun, 18 Jan 2009, Jeff King wrote:

Show 15 quoted lines

> On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 10:41:13AM +0100, Stephan Beyer wrote:
> 
> > > Looks sane except that I do not think you need printf nor the leading
> > > blank line, i.e.
> > > 
> > > 	echo "Patch failed at $msgnum ($FIRSTLINE)"
> > 
> > Hmm, IIRC if $FIRSTLINE contains \n or something like that, it will
> > interpret this as newline in some shell/echo implementations.
> > 
> > So printf "...%s..." "$FOO" is always sane for user input.
> 
> Yes, I'm surprised Junio doesn't remember the mass conversions we 
> already had to do (4b7cc26a and 293623ed). But looking at the date, I 
> guess it _has_ been a year and a half. :)

Hey, be nice to Junio. Have you seen the amount of mails on this list recently? I think Junio's the only one really reading all of them; even if you were right, he would be entitled to a nicer reminder.

But you are wrong.  And Stephan is wrong, too.

The name "FIRSTLINE" suggests that it is indeed a first line, and consequently cannot contain a newline.

And indeed, it is defined as

	FIRSTLINE=$(sed 1q "$dotest/final-commit")

Just do the following in any of your favorite shells:

	$ FIRSTLINE=$(sed 1q README)
	$ echo "$FIRSTLINE."

You'll find that the "." is not in a new line.

And I know that we relied on that behavior for an eternity.

So there is certainly no need for a printf here.

'nuff said, Dscho