Re: [PATCHv5] rebase [-i --exec | -ix] <CMD>...

Am 13.06.2012 21:38, schrieb konglu@minatec.inpg.fr:

Junio C Hamano [off-list ref] a écrit :

quoted

It looks that editing

    pick foo            pick foo
    exec cmd1           exec cmd1 && cmd2
    exec cmd2
    pick bar            pick bar
    exec cmd1           exec cmd1 && cmd2
    exec cmd2

to

    pick foo            pick foo
                        exec         cmd2
    exec cmd2
    pick bar            pick bar
    exec cmd1           exec cmd1

would take exactly the same effort, at least to me.  And more
importantly, without editing don't they do *exactly* the same thing?
If cmd1 fails, the sequencing stops at that step without running cmd2.

True. I was thinking under the fact that the user would edit the commands
by himself but the purpose of the "--exec" option is to avoid that (or at
least that the user won't have to type all by himself). Forget what I said
then :).

Not so fast.

	exec cmd1 && cmd2
and
	exec cmd1
	exec cmd2

are far from equivalent: If cmd1 fails, the first version never runs
cmd2, but the second version runs cmd2 upon rebase --continue.

The updated documentation should not say that the two are "equivalent".

-- Hannes