Re: [RFC] bisect: Introduce skip-when to automatically skip commits

> Hey Phillip,
> 
> On 07-04-2024 16:09, phillip.wood123@gmail.com wrote:
>> On 06/04/2024 20:17, Olliver Schinagl wrote:
>>> Hey Phillip,
>>>
>>> On 06-04-2024 15:50, Phillip Wood wrote:
>>>> Hi Olliver
>>>>
>>>> On 06/04/2024 11:06, Olliver Schinagl wrote:
>>>>> On 06-04-2024 03:08, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>>>>>> Olliver Schinagl <oliver@schinagl.nl> writes:
>>>> If you search builtin/bisect.c you'll see some existing callers of 
>>>> strbuf_read_file() that read other files like BISECT_START. Those 
>>>> callers should give you an idea of how to use it.
>>>
>>> Yeah, I found after Junio's hint :) What threw me off, as I wrote 
>>> earlier, get_terms(). I wonder now, why is get_terms() implemented as 
>>> it is, and should it not use the same functions? Or is it because 
>>> terms is a multi-line file, whereas the others are all single line (I 
>>> didn't look, though I see addline functions for the strbuf functions. 
>>> Should this be refactored?
>>
>> get_terms() wants to read the first line into `term_bad` and the 
>> second line into `term_good` so it makes sense that it uses two calls 
>> to `strbuf_getline()` to do that. It does not want to read the whole 
>> file into a single buffer as we do here.
> 
> Right, but I why not use strbuf_getline()?

>>> So with the name, I started to think some more about it, and after 
>>> playing with some names, I settled on 'bisect-post-checkout'. Things 
>>> then sort of fell more into place. It is still a hook/commandline 
>>> option, but it's a much smaller change (since we don't have any 
>>> special code to check the exit code anymore) as we can (obviously) 
>>> run `git bisect skip` instead of `exit 125` as well of course.
>>
>> Does that mean you will be starting "git bisect skip" from the script 
>> run by the current "git bisect" process. I don't think calling git 
>> recursively like that is a good idea as you'll potentially end up with 
>> a bunch of "git bisect" processes all waiting for their post checkout 
>> script to finish running.
> 
> Well the process is inherently recursive, though that's up to the user 
> depending on what they put in their script of course. I don't think git 
> is 'waiting' is it? In that, git bisect runs the command, the command 
> runs git bisect, git bisect stores the commit hash in the skip file and 
> 'exists', which goes then back to the bisect job, which then continues 
> as it normally would.
> 
> So technically, we're not doing anything bad in git, but a user might do 
> something bad.