Re: do people find t5504.8 flaky?
- From
Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
- Date
- Apr 29, 2019, 13:36 UTC
- Message-ID
- <nycvar.QRO.7.76.6.1904290927210.45@tvgsbejvaqbjf.bet>
- In-Reply-To
- <xmqqmukh5tj6.fsf@gitster-ct.c.googlers.com>
Hi Junio,
On Tue, 23 Apr 2019, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> I have been seeing occasional failures of t5504-fetch-receive-strict > test on the cc/replace-graft-peel-tags topic, but it seems that the > fork point of that topic from the mainline already fails the same > step #8, only less frequently.
Sounds familiar. IIRC it fails on Azure Pipelines from time to time, most often in linux-clang, less often in linux32. But I don't have hard data on that, I am still trying to get a grip on making the CI builds more robust without having to ask you to integrate azure-pipelines.yml changes into *all* branches.
Currently, my idea is to have two different Azure Pipelines set up: one that performs the continuous testing using azure-pipelines.yml on your maint, master, next and pu (do you want jch, too?) [*1*], and one that has a separate build definition and tries to work around many (all?) known issues with existing branches, e.g. coping with the known SIGPIPE issues in the git-daemon tests on macOS that *have* been addressed in master but not in some of the other branches that are accumulated into pu [*2*]. This latter build is *not* using azure-pipelines.yml, but a build definition that is maintained directly in Azure Pipelines ("Visual Designer" is what this feature is called in Azure Pipelines).
Ciao, Dscho
Footnote *1*: https://dev.azure.com/gitgitgadget/git/_build?definitionId=6
Footnote *2*: https://dev.azure.com/gitgitgadget/git/_build?definitionId=4