From: Junio C Hamano Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2014 18:34:23 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH] t1304: Set LOGNAME even if USER is unset or null Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20141020152809.GR17200@odin.tremily.us> "W. Trevor King" writes: > On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 03:49:36PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> I'll queue this as-is, but it makes me wonder if we want to do this >> without if/then/fi, e.g. >> >> : ${LOGNAME:=${USER:-$(id -u -n)} > > I'm fine with that too. > >> Spelling everything out with if/then/fi is obviously at the other >> extreme, i.e. > > And I'm fine with this ;). > >> More importantly, what if none of the alternatives work? I >> personally feel it is OK to punt and declare test_done early, >> instead of giving false positive breakages like you saw without this >> patch. > > I can put this into a v2 if you like. Which conditional syntax do you > prefer? Probably if test -z "$LOGNAME" then LOGNAME="${USER:-$(id -u -n)}" else : cannot test acl operations without a usable user name test_punt! fi