Re: [PATCH] Trapping exit in tests, using return for errors

Hi, Junio! On Wed, 2005-08-10 at 23:31 -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Junio C Hamano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Sorry, sent it out without finishing. The worst is "return". > > Ah, my mistake. You have the eval that can eval "return" in a > function and let that "return" return from tha

Re: [PATCH] Trapping exit in tests, using return for errors

Junio C Hamano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Sorry, sent it out without finishing. The worst is "return". Ah, my mistake. You have the eval that can eval "return" in a function and let that "return" return from that function. Cleverly done. Thanks. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the li

Re: [PATCH] Trapping exit in tests, using return for errors

Sorry, sent it out without finishing. The worst is "return". With ksh, ash, and dash, the script itself exits with status code 1 (presumably you are trapping it with trap -- exit, though). prompt$ bash k.sh exit foo prompt$ bash k.sh false foo status 1 prompt$ bash k.sh return foo k.sh: line 20:

Re: [PATCH] Trapping exit in tests, using return for errors

Pavel Roskin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > This patch does following: > > All instances of "exit", "exit 1" and "(exit 1)" in tests have been > replaced with "return 1". In fact, "(exit 1)" had no effect. Are you sure about all of the above? You are right about "... || exit" in the expect_succe

[PATCH] Trapping exit in tests, using return for errors

Hello! I have noticed that "make test" fails without any explanations when the "merge" utility is missing. I don't think tests should be silent in case of failure. It turned out that the particular test was using "exit" to interrupt the test in case of an error. This caused the whole test scrip