Re: [PATCH] t/README: tests can use perl even with NO_PERL

2013-10-28 Thread Ben Walton
On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 9:04 PM, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > Jeff King wrote: > >> Speaking of which, is there any reason to use the ugly "$PERL_PATH" >> everywhere, and not simply do: >> >> perl () { >> "$PERL_PATH" "$@" >> } >> >> in test-lib.sh? > > Sounds like a nice potential improvement

Re: [PATCH] t/README: tests can use perl even with NO_PERL

2013-10-28 Thread Jonathan Nieder
Jeff King wrote: > Speaking of which, is there any reason to use the ugly "$PERL_PATH" > everywhere, and not simply do: > > perl () { > "$PERL_PATH" "$@" > } > > in test-lib.sh? Sounds like a nice potential improvement to me. :) Thanks, Jonathan -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the

Re: [PATCH] t/README: tests can use perl even with NO_PERL

2013-10-28 Thread Jeff King
On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 12:22:16PM -0700, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > The git build system supports a NO_PERL switch to avoid installing > perl bindings or other features (like "git add --patch") that rely on > perl on runtime, but even with NO_PERL it has not been possible for a > long time to run t

Re: [PATCH] t/README: tests can use perl even with NO_PERL

2013-10-28 Thread Johannes Sixt
Am 28.10.2013 20:22, schrieb Jonathan Nieder: > The git build system supports a NO_PERL switch to avoid installing > perl bindings or other features (like "git add --patch") that rely on > perl on runtime, but even with NO_PERL it has not been possible for a > long time to run tests without perl.

[PATCH] t/README: tests can use perl even with NO_PERL

2013-10-28 Thread Jonathan Nieder
The git build system supports a NO_PERL switch to avoid installing perl bindings or other features (like "git add --patch") that rely on perl on runtime, but even with NO_PERL it has not been possible for a long time to run tests without perl. Helpers such as nul_to_q () {