Re: Prove "Tests out of sequence" Error

From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Date: Oct 21, 2016, 15:35 UTC
Message-ID: <20161021153534.mjed3sqhxjelxzwx@sigill.intra.peff.net>
In-Reply-To: <CA+P7+xozpk2-WZUYtaKmCazG3Owzpa3bsDejyUuGj0YEQnJWJg@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 08:29:49AM -0700, Jacob Keller wrote:

Show 20 quoted lines

> > The Travis tests do exactly this (along with --tee to actually save the
> > output). It seems like a minor miracle that this is the first test
> > output that has actually triggered as TAP input. I'd suggest that the
> > problem is not in the test, though, but that our "--verbose" option is
> > unsuitable for using with a TAP harness.
> >
> > The obvious fix would be to send "--verbose" output to stderr, but I
> > suspect that would end up annoying for people who do:
> >
> >   ./t5547-push-quarantine.sh -v | less
> >
> > to read long output. Probably we need some option like "--log" which
> > logs in the same way that "--tee" does, but _without_ sending the data
> > to stdout. Naively, that just means replacing the "tee" invocation with
> > "cat", but I suspect it will be a lot more complicated than that,
> > because we still need to let the TAP output go to stdout.
> 
> Can we determine that we're running with something monitoring the TAP
> output? Because then we could make verbose go to stderr instead
> dynamically?

I think $HARNESS_ACTIVE could tell us that. But the hard part isn't activating it; it's directing the verbose output to the log without sending it to stdout.

See the patch I posted later in the thread, and my musings on auto-activating it. I guess we could do so safely when we see $HARNESS_ACTIVE along with "--tee" and "--verbose", though I don't know if it's worth the trouble.

For $HARNESS_ACTIVE with _just_ "--verbose", I don't think it would be a good idea to activate it. We should either silently ignore --verbose then, or complain and die.

-Peff