Move pipefail option in bbl-up/task script #117
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This was causing errors when running on a linux setup
|
We have created an issue in Pivotal Tracker to manage this: https://www.pivotaltracker.com/story/show/176273336 The labels on this github issue will be updated when the story is started. |
jamespollard8
approved these changes
Dec 23, 2020
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What is this change about?
A previous PR introduced the
pipefailoption to thebbl-uptask. However, the formatting of that change does not work on linux machines, since linux interprets anything after the shebang as one argument (see https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/533415/invalid-option-name-error-with-shebang-bin-bash-o-pipefail-in-script).This is a simple change to pull the
pipefailoption into a newline so it gets parsed correctly.Please provide contextual information.
Previous PR: #116
Please check all that apply for this PR:
Did you update the README as appropriate for this change?
What is the level of urgency for publishing this change?
*but worth calling out that this had broken our pipeline, and may have done the same for others.
Tag your pair, your PM, and/or team!
@sweinstein22