From: Erik Faye-Lund <kusmabite@googlemail.com>
Date: Sun, 29 Mar 2009 21:44:10 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] test-suite: adding a test for fast-export with tag variants
Message-ID: <40aa078e0903291444m3a29662j3162ed511eee0ac8@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <7vwsa8ow10.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org>

On Sun, Mar 29, 2009 at 11:32 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
> Even if the tested program crashes, it is Ok to test them inside
> expect_failure, so I'd suggest not commenting the first two out.

OK, the reason why I didn't want to do that is because the test
appears to succeed on windows when it crashes. But you might not care
too much about that ;)

> But running the tests with the first patch applied to the same base as
> where v1 was applied gives this, which is a more serious issue:
>
>    $ sh t9301-fast-export.sh 2>&1 | tail -n 2
>    * still have 4 known breakage(s)
>    * failed 6 among remaining 15 test(s)
>
> In other words, the changes to the set-up part seem to break unrelated
> tests.  Why can such an update supersede the previous one?

That's weird. I did test it properly before I applied it, and I don't
recall having any failures on Linux. On Windows, I get lots of
failures with vanilla git.git, and I don't have access to my Linux-box
right now, so I can't easily verify this until that box comes up
again. I did see that another patch (ebeec7d) has made it's way into
the test since I submitted it - perhaps these two collided?

But OK, I'll have a look at it when that box comes up, and see if I
can come up with a good patch-series.

-- 
Erik "kusma" Faye-Lund
kusmabite@gmail.com
(+47) 986 59 656