Re: regression in new built-in stash + fsmonitor (was Re: [PATCH v13 11/27] stash: convert apply to builtin)
- From
Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
- Date
- Mar 14, 2019, 15:20 UTC
- Message-ID
- <nycvar.QRO.7.76.6.1903141600020.41@tvgsbejvaqbjf.bet>
- In-Reply-To
- <87ftrpbnkg.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com>
Hi Ævar,
On Thu, 14 Mar 2019, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
Show 57 quoted lines
> On Tue, Feb 26 2019, Thomas Gummerer wrote:
>
> > From: Joel Teichroeb <joel@teichroeb.net>
> >
> > Add a builtin helper for performing stash commands. Converting
> > all at once proved hard to review, so starting with just apply
> > lets conversion get started without the other commands being
> > finished.
> >
> > The helper is being implemented as a drop in replacement for
> > stash so that when it is complete it can simply be renamed and
> > the shell script deleted.
> >
> > Delete the contents of the apply_stash shell function and replace
> > it with a call to stash--helper apply until pop is also
> > converted.
>
> This
>
> GIT_TEST_FSMONITOR=$PWD/t7519/fsmonitor-all ./t3420-rebase-autostash.sh
>
> Now fails, which bisects to 8a0fc8d19d ("stash: convert apply to
> builtin", 2019-02-25).
>
> Tested on both a CentOS 6 & modern Debian testing machine:
>
> + git rebase -i --autostash HEAD^
> Created autostash: 5cd734b
> HEAD is now at 0c4d2f1 third commit
> hint: Waiting for your editor to close the file...
> error: There was a problem with the editor '"$FAKE_EDITOR"'.
> Applied autostash.
> + exit_code=1
> + test 1 -eq 0
> + test_match_signal 13 1
> + test 1 = 141
> + test 1 = 269
> + return 1
> + test 1 -gt 129
> + test 1 -eq 127
> + test 1 -eq 126
> + return 0
> + rm -f abort-editor.sh
> + echo conflicting-content
> + test_cmp expected file0
> + diff -u expected file0
> --- expected 2019-03-14 13:19:08.212215263 +0000
> +++ file0 2019-03-14 13:19:08.196215250 +0000
> @@ -1 +1 @@
> -conflicting-content
> +uncommitted-content
> error: last command exited with $?=1
> not ok 36 - autostash is saved on editor failure with conflict
>
> Are you able to reproduce this? And if so I suggest running the test
> suite with some of the other GIT_TEST_* modes documented in
> t/README. Maybe it'll turn up something else...Yep, totally can reproduce it :-(
I'll try to investigate a bit, Dscho