Re: [PATCH] t0021, t5615: use $PWD instead of $(pwd) in PATH-like shell variables

(off-list ancestor, not in this archive)
Re: [PATCH] t0021, t5615: use $PWD instead of $(pwd) in PATH-like shell variables · Junio C Hamano <hidden> · 2016-11-14
Re: [PATCH] t0021, t5615: use $PWD instead of $(pwd) in PATH-like shell variables · Johannes Schindelin <hidden> · 2016-11-15
Re: [PATCH] t0021, t5615: use $PWD instead of $(pwd) in PATH-like shell variables · Johannes Schindelin <hidden> · 2016-11-16

From: Johannes Schindelin <hidden>
Date: 2016-11-15 16:54:42

Hi Junio,

On Mon, 14 Nov 2016, Junio C Hamano wrote:

Dscho's mention of 'still times out' may be an indiciation that
something unspecified on 'pu' is not ready to be merged to 'next',
but blocking all of 'pu' with a blanket statement is not useful,
and that was where my response comes from.

Until the time when the test suite takes less than the insane three hours
to run, I am afraid that a blanket statement on `pu` is the best I can do.

Ciao,
Johannes

`h`	back out one level
`j`	next message in thread
`k`	previous message in thread
`l`	drill in
`Esc`	close help / fold thread tree
`?`	toggle this help