Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] ident: stop assuming that `gw_gecos` is writable

From: Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im>
Date: Mar 7, 2025, 10:02 UTC
Message-ID: <Z8rEIffQeVCjd_U8@pks.im>
In-Reply-To: <xmqq8qpijezc.fsf@gitster.g>

On Thu, Mar 06, 2025 at 08:33:43AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:

Show 24 quoted lines

> "Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@gmail.com>
> writes:
> 
> > In other words, contrary to my expectations, the `win+Meson` job is
> > ill-equipped to replace the `win build` job because it exercises a
> > completely different tool version/compiler flags vector than what Git
> > for Windows needs.
> 
> It is apparent that meson support is a new procedure to build our
> codebase that is untested and unproven on Windows at all, given that
> among all people who may have stake in Windows you are discovering
> problems in it this late in the cycle.  Nobody knows what other
> breakages, other than something obvious and easy to catch like "ah,
> compiler refuses to go further", are lurking under the radar.
> 
> I would be reluctant to trust the build artifact out of meson-based
> build on Windows after seeing your report, especially the above
> part.
> 
> A reasonable alternative may be to declare that meson-based build is
> not ready yet at this point, and possibly disable win+Meson jobs to
> punt and divert our engineering resources elsewhere in the meantime.
> For a new thing, having an uneven support depending on the platform
> early in the evolution is not unusual or to be ashamed of.

I think it would be a bit sad to disable those jobs. They build and pass the test suite alright in Git itself, even though they fail downstream in Git for Windows. They help me quite a bit to ensure that I don't regress anything that already is working while I'm iterating on the current set of features. So in the end, I view them more as testing more variants of Windows than replacing what we currently have, similar to how we test Git on different Linux distributions.

I have said before that I'm very willing to help to figure out any issues, regardless of which platform, and I stand by that statement -- if you see anything that is broken in this context and report the issue to me I'll jump on it immediately.

Show 13 quoted lines

> > Nevertheless, there is currently this huge push, including breaking
> > changes after -rc1 and all, for switching to Meson. Therefore, we need
> > to make it work, somehow, even in Git for Windows' SDK, hence this
> > patch, at this point in time.
> 
> As I said earlier already, I do not mind turning the type of this
> pointer, which is only used to read from a struct member, like this
> patch does.  It is the right thing to do, so I'll apply.
> 
> But I personally would not be comfortable with the product built
> with "completely different tool version/compiler flags vector than
> what G4W needs", even the compilation passes with just this small
> change.  If I were using Windows, that is.

That's completely fair. The CI job we have isn't meant to verify that we have a G4W-compatible distribution falling out of it, it merely verifies that we can build and pass tests in such a "standalone" (that is, without the SDK) configuration. We might eventually want to introduce another job that _does_ use the SDK with Meson, as well, but I didn't yet see a need for that until now.

Patrick