{"thread":{"id":"51254","subject":"RE: [ANNOUNCE] Git v2.22.0-rc3","startedAt":"2019-06-06T20:04:44Z","lastAt":"2019-06-06T20:04:44Z","messageCount":1,"participants":["Randall S. Becker"],"isPatch":false,"patchVersion":null,"patchTotal":null},"messages":[{"id":"376781","messageId":"00c901d51ca3$0fd17590$2f7460b0$@nexbridge.com","threadId":"51254","inReplyTo":null,"subject":"RE: [ANNOUNCE] Git v2.22.0-rc3","fromName":"Randall S. Becker","fromEmail":"rsbecker@nexbridge.com","sentAt":"2019-06-06T20:04:29Z","receivedAt":"2019-06-06T20:04:44Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"randall.becker@nexbridge.ca","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/28956764?v=4"},"body":"On Monday, June 3, 2019 10:14 AM, I wrote:\n> On Monday, June 3, 2019 9:50 AM, Johannes Schindelin wrote:\n> > To: Randall S. Becker <rsbecker@nexbridge.com>\n> > Cc: 'Junio C Hamano' <gitster@pobox.com>; git@vger.kernel.org\n> > Subject: RE: [ANNOUNCE] Git v2.22.0-rc2\n> >\n> > Hi Randall,\n> >\n> > On Sun, 2 Jun 2019, Randall S. Becker wrote:\n> >\n> > > Just a few small nits from RC2 test results on the NonStop TNS/E\n> > > platform:\n> > >\n> > > 1. t0021 subtest 15 is being flakey. It fails on the first run (make\n> > > -k\n> > > test) but succeeds when run in isolation. This is new on the NonStop\n> > > TNS/E platform. t0021 has been a bit flakey in the past, but not\n> > > recently. Just thought I'd mention it. It's only slightly\n> > > disconcerting because I make very heavy use of smudge filters but\n> > > since it runs fine in isolation, I'm going to assume it is fine. We\n> > > had one unsubstantiated report of an occasional misfire of smudge\n> > > filters, but no substantive evidence at this point to reproduce the\n> situation.\n> >\n> > t0021.15 is indeed flaky, and not only for NonStop. It is so flaky,\n> > even,\n> that I\n> > opened https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git/issues/241\n> \n> Thanks.\n> \n> > > 2. t7519 subtest 25 still does not pass (previously reported for\n> > > RC1) when run via \"make -k test\" the first time. This runs\n> > > successfully when run in isolation or the second time.\n> >\n> > I offered a fix for that in js/fsmonitor-unflake, and it already made\n> > it\n> into\n> > `next` (and hopefully into v2.22.0) as you can see here:\n> > https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git/commit/b5a81697520 (look for the\n> > branch symbol below the commit message).\n> \n> I'll keep an eye out for it. We are good with RC2 anyway.\n> \n> > > 3. t9001, t9020, t9600, t9601, t9602, t9604, fail, but should not\n> > > run on platform (not new, just a reminder). We do not have sendmail\n> > > or subversion.\n> >\n> > At least for Subversion, this should be detected. For send-email, I\n> > don't know... There *was* a bug in t9001 where it failed to mark a\n> > send-email tests cases with the `PERL` prerequisite, but that was\n> > fixed, and I guess\n> you\n> > have Perl anyway?\n> \n> Yes, we do have Perl on the box. However, the send-email functions do not\n> work - probably missing modules. As far as SVN goes, we have the git SVN\n> modules, but not the actual SVM modules in our Perl. There has been some\n> effort to port those, but we have had CPAN issues for a while now. I am\n> trying to find a resource to help with porting - personally, I could\nreally use\n> the SVN module to allow svn2git to function on box. That would make my\n> life a whole lot easier.\n\nRC3 shows no new breaks on NonStop. We are good with approving this one.\n\nKind Regards,\nRandall\n\n"}]}