Re: [BUGS] Git v2.51.2 on NonStop5
- From
SZEDER Gábor <szeder.dev@gmail.com>
- Date
- Oct 30, 2025, 22:30 UTC
- Message-ID
- <aQPnDrsKLsLpaxgI@szeder.dev>
- In-Reply-To
- <009f01dc49e6$98c5ae30$ca510a90$@nexbridge.com>
On Thu, Oct 30, 2025 at 05:46:01PM -0400, rsbecker@nexbridge.com wrote:
Show 34 quoted lines
> On October 30, 2025 4:26 PM, Kristoffer Haugsbakk wrote: > >On Thu, Oct 30, 2025, at 20:42, Junio C Hamano wrote: > >> "Kristoffer Haugsbakk" <kristofferhaugsbakk@fastmail.com> writes: > >> > >>> On Tue, Oct 28, 2025, at 18:40, rsbecker@nexbridge.com wrote: > >>>>[snip] > >>> > >>> Would it make sense for maintenance releases to have a small release > >>> candidate pre-release? Both of these maintenance releases have had > >>> issues. > >> > >> Well, that is usually called "the tip of 'master'". Has NonStop been > >> having issues with the tip of 'master'? For how long? Why haven't we > >> heard about it at all? After things are merged there (which requires > >> them to be cooking in 'next'---oh, has NonStop been having issues with > >> 'next'? For how long?), only fixes are chosen and merged to 'maint' > >> to be the next maintenance release. > >> ... > >> I doubt any pre-release on 'maint' has much value in that anybody who > >> are not testing the tip of 'master' would not be testing it either. > > > >You are probably 99.9% likely to be correct. > > We tried setting up a CI/CD process for git on NonStop. The problem is that > we use Jenkins, which gets triggered each time a change is made on a branch. > The actual difficulty is that a single run takes more than a day. Once the > committer adds each commit to a branch, we end up with a queue that is > 2-3 weeks long, so end up not running a continuous process. Instead, we > run about 1 a week, which should catch things. The difficulty is with the > latest release is that 2.25.2 came out before our cycle and the breaks were > in there because of changes to one test that just did not end up dequeuing > in time. NonStop is building and testing fine now after Peff's suggestion on > SHELL_PATH, but that was only apparent at 2.52.2. 2.51.1 did not have this > issue with our inadvertent use of ksh to run each test script.
Neither the test library nor t7900 changed in the last two maintenance releases:
$ git rev-list --count v2.51.0..v2.51.2 -- t/test-lib.sh t/test-lib-functions.sh t/t7900-maintenance.sh 0