From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D86F4C433EF for ; Wed, 8 Sep 2021 00:14:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BAB3061108 for ; Wed, 8 Sep 2021 00:14:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1347208AbhIHAPm (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Sep 2021 20:15:42 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp21.pobox.com ([173.228.157.53]:56309 "EHLO pb-smtp21.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S233183AbhIHAPm (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Sep 2021 20:15:42 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp21.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17CE01460FF; Tue, 7 Sep 2021 20:14:35 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=3Me+njo7zVVZWXwPdfrEoS9IMxOHlRecB4fHmk t2HYY=; b=Sn6ZLyOgqzPWU94TjERWWELmMhGXV0VCWJdh8r2XUpwFWC9TOHgrh5 vdGYdCEMBp2nX/riWBVrulc715vN6QbaC92lNsnrRTXbCOX2xdvimbURQnRAWzZK 2QltqB2VYw4I92K31robQqzPbZlKkTVztIaL0ptoGVDRBBqbeW8wk= Received: from pb-smtp21.sea.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 110C91460FE; Tue, 7 Sep 2021 20:14:35 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [104.196.172.107]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 547511460ED; Tue, 7 Sep 2021 20:14:32 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: git@vger.kernel.org Cc: Atharva Raykar , Emily Shaffer , Jonathan Nieder , Christian Couder , Shourya Shukla , Kaartic Sivaraam , Prathamesh Chavan Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] submodule--helper: run update procedures from C References: <20210813075653.56817-1-raykar.ath@gmail.com> <20210824140609.1496-1-raykar.ath@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 07 Sep 2021 17:14:30 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20210824140609.1496-1-raykar.ath@gmail.com> (Atharva Raykar's message of "Tue, 24 Aug 2021 19:36:09 +0530") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: BDB577D8-1039-11EC-A1B8-98D80D944F46-77302942!pb-smtp21.pobox.com Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Atharva Raykar writes: > * Fix error message handling of the output of 'run-update-procedure'. While at > it, ensure the "checkout" mode error message is stored and printed > appropriately. > > * In 'run_update_command()' switch from 'run_command()' to > 'run_command_v_opt_cd_env()' to ensure quoted command update modes are handled > correctly. > > * Code style and hygiene changes. > > * Introduce a NEEDSWORK comment, because the printf() and error return is > correct only because the shell caller in the other end redirects it to the > correct output stream. Once we switch this completely to C (ie, in the > follow-up series), I need to remember to die() instead (or print to stderr) to > reproduce the original behaviour. I didn't see anybody comment on this round (and do not think I saw anything glaringly wrong). Is everybody happy with this version? I am about to mark it for 'next' in the next issue of "What's cooking" report, so please holler if I should wait. Thanks.