[Resent using René's correct email address this time, sorry for the noise]

On Fri, Jun 06, 2014 at 07:55:58AM -0700, Elia Pinto wrote:
> The construct is error-prone; "test" being built-in in most modern
> shells, the reason to avoid "test <cond> && test <cond>" spawning
> one extra process by using a single "test <cond> -a <cond>" no
> longer exists.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Elia Pinto <gitter.spi...@gmail.com>
> ---
>  t/t5000-tar-tree.sh |    2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/t/t5000-tar-tree.sh b/t/t5000-tar-tree.sh
> index 74fc5a8..ad6fa0d 100755
> --- a/t/t5000-tar-tree.sh
> +++ b/t/t5000-tar-tree.sh
> @@ -72,7 +72,7 @@ check_tar() {
>                       for header in *.paxheader
>                       do
>                               data=${header%.paxheader}.data &&
> -                             if test -h $data -o -e $data
> +                             if test -h $data || test -e $data
>                               then

This looks okay, but it raises a question for the original author
(René, I think that's you so I've added you to the To: line).

Should that be "test -f" instead of "test -e"?

This is a very minor note and should not block this patch.
It's probably a change that's better made in a follow-up patch.

>                                       path=$(get_pax_header $header path) &&
>                                       if test -n "$path"
-- 
David
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to