Re: [PATCH 0/2] t/lib-gpg: a gpgsm fix, a minor improvement, and a question

From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Date: Feb 12, 2019, 00:44 UTC
Message-ID: <20190212004433.GJ13301@sigill.intra.peff.net>
In-Reply-To: <20190209140605.GE10587@szeder.dev>

On Sat, Feb 09, 2019 at 03:06:05PM +0100, SZEDER Gábor wrote:

Show 17 quoted lines

> On Thu, Feb 07, 2019 at 10:17:44PM -0500, Todd Zullinger wrote:
> > Looking through the build logs for the fedora git packages, I noticed it
> > was missing the GPGSM prereq.
> 
> Just curious: how did you noticed the missing GPGSM prereq?
> 
> I'm asking because I use a patch for a good couple of months now that
> collects the prereqs missed by test cases and prints them at the end
> of 'make test'.  Its output looks like this:
> 
>   https://travis-ci.org/szeder/git/jobs/490944032#L2358
> 
> Since you seem to be interested in that sort of thing as well, perhaps
> it would be worth to have something like this in git.git?  It's just
> that I have been too wary of potentially annoying other contributors
> by adding (what might be perceived as) clutter to their 'make test'
> output :)

At first I thought your script found tests which _should_ have been marked with a particular prereq but weren't. And I scratched my head about how you would find that automatically. If we could, that would be amazing. ;)

But it looks from the output like it just mentions every prereq that wasn't satisfied. I don't think that's particularly useful to show for all users, since most of them are platform things that cannot be changed (and you'd never get the list to zero, since some of them are mutually exclusive).

-Peff