build: Fix shell syntax #62
Conversation
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #62 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 61.79% 61.79%
=======================================
Files 14 14
Lines 746 746
=======================================
Hits 461 461
Misses 244 244
Partials 41 41Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
| @@ -142,6 +142,6 @@ push: docker-image-build | |||
| $(DOCKER_PUSH) $(call unescape_docker_tag,$(DOCKER_IMAGE_VERSIONED)) | |||
| @if [ "$$TRAVIS_TAG" != "" ]; then \ | |||
| $(DOCKER_TAG) $(call unescape_docker_tag,$(DOCKER_IMAGE_VERSIONED)) \ | |||
| $(call unescape_docker_tag,$(DOCKER_IMAGE)):latest | |||
| $(DOCKER_PUSH) $(call unescape_docker_tag,$(DOCKER_IMAGE):latest) | |||
| $(call unescape_docker_tag,$(DOCKER_IMAGE)):latest; \ | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Shouldn't this ; be an &&?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It can be both, I used ; because:
- it's the way it was, and has worked fine so far
- it'll fail eitherwise
- it may give a false sensation of having some kind of transactional support, which we don't, and I don't think it's worth at this moment.
I'm not strongly against it though, so I can change it if you prefer.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm not strong against it either, just commenting the usual way to write those commands in Dockerfiles. Your arguments make sense and the only advantage of the && would be that the script would fail at the specific point of failure (and not one command later) so leave it with the ; if you want.
No description provided.