From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [PATCH] git-add--interactive: manual hunk editing mode Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2008 04:32:14 -0400 Message-ID: <20080702083214.GA22301@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <20080701101114.GA6379@sigill.intra.peff.net> <1214912674-9443-1-git-send-email-trast@student.ethz.ch> <7v7ic4hmj5.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> <20080702080200.GA21367@sigill.intra.peff.net> <7vd4lwemja.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: Thomas Rast , git@vger.kernel.org To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Jul 02 10:33:15 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1KDxm6-0001D4-QA for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Wed, 02 Jul 2008 10:33:15 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751156AbYGBIcS (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Jul 2008 04:32:18 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751016AbYGBIcS (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Jul 2008 04:32:18 -0400 Received: from peff.net ([208.65.91.99]:4841 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751000AbYGBIcR (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Jul 2008 04:32:17 -0400 Received: (qmail 1912 invoked by uid 111); 2 Jul 2008 08:32:15 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) (smtp-auth username relayok, mechanism cram-md5) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.32) with ESMTP; Wed, 02 Jul 2008 04:32:15 -0400 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Wed, 02 Jul 2008 04:32:14 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <7vd4lwemja.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Wed, Jul 02, 2008 at 01:08:09AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > So if the problem is "old perl", I don't think it is an issue. Are there > > modern perl installations in the wild that don't have File::Temp? > > The thing is, I think I heard quite similar explanation why Test::More is > safe to use when the patch to add t/t9700 was submit. Then what happened? ISTR the Test::More problem was reported by Linus, who is a Fedora user? I tried searching for any reasonable information on which of the core perl modules are installed by default on Fedora systems, but didn't come up with anything useful. I really have no clue as to what is out there, and I suspect we must either play it totally safe, or push the limits and wait for people to complain about breakage. -Peff