RE: [Failure] Re: git 2.40.0-rc1

><rsbecker@nexbridge.com> writes:
>
>> On Thursday, March 2, 2023 1:44 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>>><rsbecker@nexbridge.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> Git 2.40.0-rc2 was a regression from rc1. The following new tests failed:
>
>I think you are reporting -rc1 relative to -rc0.
>
>>>> t3206 - virtually all subtests failed. An example of this failure is
>>>> a results comparison in subtest 1 (seemingly relating to abbreviation):
>>>> + test_cmp expect actual
>>>> --- expect      2023-03-02 16:39:23 +0000
>>>> +++ actual      2023-03-02 16:39:23 +0000
>>>> @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
>>>> -1:  4de457d = 1:  35b9b25 s/5/A/
>>>> -2:  fccce22 = 2:  de345ab s/4/A/
>>>> -3:  147e64e = 3:  9af6654 s/11/B/
>>>> -4:  a63e992 = 4:  2901f77 s/12/B/
>>>> +1:  4de457d2c0d218f48d66f45f9b30f3aa62562105 = 1:
>>>> 35b9b25f76d404d09a23e6c8efa96c3ce19e19aa s/5/A/
>>>
>>>Are any big endian machines involved?
>>>
>>>cf. https://lore.kernel.org/git/Y%2F+paI8WGSmEbv%2Fw@pobox.com/
>>
>> Oh yes. All NonStop variants are big-endian. That hasn't changed the
>> SHA-1 signatures though.
>
>There is a stupid sequence that slipped through the review
>
>	char c = structPtr->intMember;
>
>	if (c < 0)
>		... do something ...
>
>and where "char" is "unsigned char", the compiler thinks "do something" will never
>trigger and from there everything goes haywire.
>
>The tip of 'master' already has a fix (and no other changes as of this writing), and
>will be part of -rc2.