René Scharfe <l....@web.de> writes: > It's more convenient because it shows differences nicely, it's faster on > MinGW because we have a special implementation there based only on > shell-internal commands,...
This made me wonder why we are not using that "faster" one everywhere, but it turns out that it depends on bash-ism "local", which is perfectly fine when limited to MinGW but not safe to assume in general. > ... > With all sum(1) calls gone, remove the MinGW-specific implementation > from test-lib.sh as well. > > [1] http://minnie.tuhs.org/cgi-bin/utree.pl?file=V3/man/man1/sum.1 > [2] > http://minnie.tuhs.org/cgi-bin/utree.pl?file=4.4BSD/usr/share/man/cat1/cksum.0 > [3] http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/utilities/cksum.html > --- > t/t1002-read-tree-m-u-2way.sh | 67 > ++++++++++++++++++++++--------------------- > t/test-lib.sh | 3 -- > 2 files changed, 35 insertions(+), 35 deletions(-) Sounds like a sensible approach to clean things up; I didn't check with fine toothed comb if the patch does follow that approach correctly without breaking things, though.
