From: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2014 22:29:36 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fsck: exit with non-zero status upon error from fsck_obj()
Message-ID: <20140909222936.GA701@google.com>
In-Reply-To: <xmqqvbowigeh.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com>

Junio C Hamano wrote:

> By the way, Jonathan, with dbedf8bf (t1450 (fsck): remove dangling
> objects, 2010-09-06) you added a 'test_might_fail git fsck' to the
> 1450 test that catches an object corruption.  Do you remember if
> there was some flakiness in this test that necessitated it, or is it
> merely "I think this should fail, but it does not, and we may fix it
> some day but I am not doing that in this patch?"

Thomas is the person to ask. :)  See v1.6.3-rc0~176^2~3 (Test fsck a
bit harder, 2009-02-19):

> +	(git fsck 2>out; true) &&

which that cleanup tightened to test_might_fail.

But yes, I'm pretty sure it was for futureproofing, not for hiding
flakiness.  I think your patch does the right thing in changing it to
test_must_fail now that fsck exits nonzero.

Thanks,
Jonathan