Re: [PATCH 6/6] remove .keep pack lock files when done with refs update

Nicolas Pitre [off-list ref] writes:

Micronit.  This cannot be right without quoting.

On Thu, 2 Nov 2006, Nicolas Pitre wrote:

OK looking at it again I think the || exit is only meant to match the 
exit 1 before that point. Since this is a subshell then the exit 1 
wouldn't exit it all on its own.  Otherwise there is no errors expected 
to trickle out of the while loop and I _think_ the above is correct.

Do you still want a new patch for the micronit quoting issue?

On Wed, 1 Nov 2006, Junio C Hamano wrote:

Nicolas Pitre [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

--- a/git-fetch.sh
+++ b/git-fetch.sh

@@ -51,7 +51,7 @@ do
 		verbose=Yes
 		;;
 	-k|--k|--ke|--kee|--keep)
-		keep=--keep
+		keep=-k -k
 		;;
 	--reflog-action=*)
 		rloga=`expr "z$1" : 'z-[^=]*=\(.*\)'`

Micronit.  This cannot be right without quoting.

OK.  Shell programming isn't really my turf.

Another area of that patch I'm not really sure of is this:

@@ -408,6 +415,7 @@ fetch_main () {
          append_fetch_head "$sha1" "$remote" \
                  "$remote_name" "$remote_nick" "$local_name" "$not_for_merge"
       done
+      if [ "$pack_lockfile" ]; then rm -f "$pack_lockfile"; fi
     ) || exit ;;
   esac

How can I make sure to not clobber a non-zero return code with the rm 
that would prevent the exit while still performing the rm in all cases?

Nicolas Pitre [off-list ref] writes:

On Thu, 2 Nov 2006, Nicolas Pitre wrote:

quoted

Another area of that patch I'm not really sure of is this:

@@ -408,6 +415,7 @@ fetch_main () {
          append_fetch_head "$sha1" "$remote" \
                  "$remote_name" "$remote_nick" "$local_name" "$not_for_merge"
       done
+      if [ "$pack_lockfile" ]; then rm -f "$pack_lockfile"; fi
     ) || exit ;;
   esac

How can I make sure to not clobber a non-zero return code with the rm 
that would prevent the exit while still performing the rm in all cases?

OK looking at it again I think the || exit is only meant to match the 
exit 1 before that point. Since this is a subshell then the exit 1 
wouldn't exit it all on its own.  Otherwise there is no errors expected 
to trickle out of the while loop and I _think_ the above is correct.

I think so too.

Do you still want a new patch for the micronit quoting issue?

Not needed, will park them in "pu" and play with them --
hopefully in "next" by the end of the week.

Thanks.