Re: [PATCH 0/2] t/lib-gpg: ensure GNUPGHOME is created as needed
- From
Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@xmission.com>
- Date
- Oct 27, 2025, 19:03 UTC
- Message-ID
- <875xc02mmq.fsf@email.froward.int.ebiederm.org>
- In-Reply-To
- <xmqqqzuoi6sg.fsf@gitster.g>
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes:
Show 38 quoted lines
> "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com> writes:
>
>> The only possible source of flakiness in the tests I can see is the
>> possibility of t/t1016/gpg not getting called (which uses a fixed
>> timestamp). It appears you just fixed that problem in commit
>> 516bf45749bb ("t1016: make sure to use specified GPG").
>
> I think that one also is in 'seen', and yet we saw t1016 flaky X-<.
>
> Let me isolate the relevant topics and test them again, i.e.
>
> $ git checkout --detach v2.51.0
> $ git merge --no-ff jc/t1016-setup-fix ;# 516bf45749
> $ git merge --no-ff tz/test-prepare-gnupghome~1 ;# 6cd8369ef3
> $ git log --no-merges --oneline v2.51.0..
> 516bf45749 (jc/t1016-setup-fix) t1016: make sure to use specified GPG
> 6cd8369ef3 t/lib-gpg: call prepare_gnupghome() in GPG2 prereq
> a35952b493 t/lib-gpg: add prepare_gnupghome() to create GNUPGHOME dir
> $ make
> $ cd t && ./t1016-*.sh --stress
> FAIL 10.1
> FAIL 5.1
> FAIL 34.1
> ...
> ++ eval 'diff -u' '"$@"'
> +++ diff -u signedcommit3_sha1 signedcommit3_sha1_expected
> --- signedcommit3_sha1 2025-10-27 17:34:58.237496945 +0000
> +++ signedcommit3_sha1_expected 2025-10-27 17:34:58.145497051 +0000
> @@ -1 +1 @@
> -de9cabc2419f97eb665452c198ed93e890a7ef87
> +c87cd5157461a81b60ef6d3c47562c12b328ef54
> error: last command exited with $?=1
> not ok 163 - Verify commit signedcommit3's sha1 oid
> #
> # git --git-dir=repo-sha256/.git rev-parse --output-object-format=sha1 ${sha256_oid} >${name}_sha1 &&
> # test_cmp ${name}_sha1 ${name}_sha1_expected
> #
> 1..163Interesting. With --stress I can reproduce the flakiness locally as well.
I am starting to dig any but I haven't found any smoking guns yet. So far manually running the commands that resulted in the failure are giving me the same output, but I have several more to run.
Show 10 quoted lines
>> With that commit reverted I can reproduce the flakiness locally >> by just running the test manually a few times. > > The above is with all three patches mentioned. > FWIW, "gpg --version | head -2" says > > gpg (GnuPG) 2.4.8 > libgcrypt 1.11.2 > > Hmmmm.....
I have gpg 2.4.7 but otherwise things are identical.
Eric