Re: [PATCH v2 4/5] t3301: use test_must_fail instead of !

From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Date: Feb 17, 2009, 20:27 UTC
Message-ID: <20090217202731.GA16586@coredump.intra.peff.net>
In-Reply-To: <e2b179460902171000s605675dct1f499a9425c3ebb2@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 06:00:17PM +0000, Mike Ralphson wrote:

Show 9 quoted lines

> > Hmm. I tried "make SHELL_PATH=/bin/posh test", and posh segfaulted during
> > t0005. So I don't think it's quite ready for mainstream use. ;)
> 
> Works ok for me as far as t3404-rebase-interactive on next, though
> what I actually grabbed in the end was 0.6.16[1], which claims to fix
> a segfault bug[2], but then it also claims to be 0.6.12 as well, so
> who knows? 8-)
> 
> Maybe a Debian user would like to report a repeat of [3]?

Hmm. It sort of fixes the segfault bug. With posh 0.6.16, I can do:

  $ posh -x
  $ ls
  + ls
  ...

but:

 $ posh -x t0005-signals.sh
 Segmentation fault

OK, maybe it doesn't like non-interactive shells. Let's try sourcing the script:

 $ posh -x
 $ . t0005-signals.sh
 + . t0005-signals.sh
 posh: .: t0005-signals.sh: not found

OK, maybe it is looking in the PATH?

 $ PATH=$PATH:.
 Segmentation fault

Oops. How about a new shell with a more exact path?

 $ posh -x
 $ . ./t0005-signals.sh
 Segmentation fault

Oops. So I think there are some serious problems (at least with -x).

Of course it's hard to diagnose the non "-x" segfault in t0005 without "-x". ;)

But this is just unproductive complaining to do it on the git list (I'm just amazed at how frequently it is segfaulting). I'll go file some Debian bug reports.

-Peff