Johannes Sixt <j.sixt@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > From: Johannes Sixt <j6t@xxxxxxxx> > > The new test does a 'chmod 0', which does not have the intended > effect on Windows. > > Signed-off-by: Johannes Sixt <j6t@xxxxxxxx> > --- > Stephen Boyd schrieb: >> Junio C Hamano wrote: >>> Why do you need POSIXPERM for this? >> >> I copied a previous test and it was doing chmod 0 foo2. > ... >> +test_expect_success POSIXPERM '--no-ignore-errors overrides config' ' >> + git config add.ignore-errors 1 && >> + git reset --hard && >> + date >foo1 && >> + date >foo2 && >> + chmod 0 foo2 && > > I can only guess that you missed this 'chmod 0' despite Stephen's > explanation and dropped POSIXPERM when you applied the patch. Actually, I wanted to add the test to 'maint' and 'maint-$v' for values of $v that are lower than 1.6.3, so I did want to drop POSIXPERM on the branch the patch initially applied; I forgot to make an evil merge when I merged the result up, crossing 1.6.2/1.6.3 boundary.. Will queue on 'maint'. Thanks. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html