Re: [PATCH 2/2] Fix t3404 assumption that `wc -l` does not use whitespace.

Johannes Schindelin [off-list ref] writes:

...  It did not 
help that I hated the fact that that series changed the original design 
without even understanding it.

Care to elaborate on this point further?  I do not get it.

Do you mean to say "I hate it because it does things differently from how
I did it originally", or "Because it does things differently from how the
original did, it breaks this and that cases"?

If the latter, "this and that" part is especially useful.  A solution to
fix that may end up to be closer to the original implementation.