# [question] && chaining vs shell loops 4 messages from 2015-03-29 to 2015-03-30. Participants: Max Kirillov, Andreas Schwab, Jeff King. Thread: https://gitlist.dev/t/38940 ## Max Kirillov, 2015-03-29 15:48 Subject: [question] && chaining vs shell loops Message-ID: <20150329154840.GA8771@wheezy.local> URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/20150329154840.GA8771%40wheezy.local ``` Hi. As far as I can see, loops in shell ignore non-zero exit codes of the bodies which are not last. For example, exit code of command 'for f in false true; do $f; done' is 0, even if there was false. How should one workaround it in test scripts, is there any established approach? -- Max ``` ## Andreas Schwab, 2015-03-29 16:07 Subject: Re: [question] && chaining vs shell loops Message-ID: <874mp3948k.fsf@igel.home> URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/874mp3948k.fsf%40igel.home In-Reply-To: <20150329154840.GA8771@wheezy.local> ``` Max Kirillov writes: > As far as I can see, loops in shell ignore non-zero exit > codes of the bodies which are not last. For example, exit > code of command 'for f in false true; do $f; done' is 0, > even if there was false. There is nothing special with loops, that's how the exit code of compound commands is defined in general: it's the exit code of the last executed command. Andreas. -- Andreas Schwab, schwab@linux-m68k.org GPG Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756 01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5 "And now for something completely different." ``` ## Jeff King, 2015-03-29 17:43 Subject: Re: [question] && chaining vs shell loops Message-ID: <20150329174312.GA6680@peff.net> URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/20150329174312.GA6680%40peff.net In-Reply-To: <874mp3948k.fsf@igel.home> ``` On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 at 06:07:39PM +0200, Andreas Schwab wrote: > Max Kirillov writes: > > > As far as I can see, loops in shell ignore non-zero exit > > codes of the bodies which are not last. For example, exit > > code of command 'for f in false true; do $f; done' is 0, > > even if there was false. > > There is nothing special with loops, that's how the exit code of > compound commands is defined in general: it's the exit code of the last > executed command. Yes, but that makes it problematic if you want to know if any of the loop iterations failed. Doing: for f in false true; do $f || break; done doesn't work, because the "break" has exit code 0. Doing: (for f in false true; do $f || exit 1; done) works. In our test scripts, it is also OK to just "return 1", because the test snippets execute inside a function. If you have other solutions, I'd love to hear them. I just fixed several of these loops recently, and I couldn't come up with anything more clever. -Peff ``` ## Max Kirillov, 2015-03-30 06:29 Subject: Re: [question] && chaining vs shell loops Message-ID: URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/CAF7_NFTxg3y9gWqHQqgt_TmOfUxA7yH2Krn4ma8SoY_-1Gx4SQ%40mail.gmail.com In-Reply-To: <20150329174312.GA6680@peff.net> ``` On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 at 8:43 PM, Jeff King wrote: > In our test scripts, it is also OK to just "return 1", because > the test snippets execute inside a function. Thanks, sounds like a plan. -- Max ```