Re: [PATCH] t4216: fix no-op test that breaks TAP output

> On Fri, Jun 19, 2026 at 09:29:44AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com> writes:
>> 
>>> Given this and the above, I would probably err on the side of
>>> designating this as 'test_lazy_prereq' or otherwise silencing the output
>>> of 'test_cmp' so that this does not taint the TAP output.
>> 
>> We can argue the merit and demerit with a good log message.  The
>> central issue at hand is how precious 52a9 in the script lost by
>> this patch is (in other words, are we checking more than "is our
>> char signed or unsigned?").
> 
> Ultimately, I don't mind much which way we go. But if we want to retain
> this, would you mind sending a rewritten v2, Taylor? I feel like you're
> in a better position to argue why we should retain it.