Re: [PATCH v5 24/24] t1406: new tests for submodule ref store

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 10:11 PM, Michael Haggerty <mhagger@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> By trial and error, I found that the test succeeds if I comment out the
> "for_each_reflog()" test. By having that test write its results to
> `/tmp` where they won't be deleted, I found that the problem is that the
> `actual` results are not sorted correctly:
>
>     refs/heads/new-master 0x0
>     refs/heads/master 0x0
>     HEAD 0x1
>
> I don't know why it's so Heisenbergish.

It happens consistently on my other laptop. And yes it looks like
sorting order problem, probably because of the underlying file system.
I did wonder about that at some point but never asked. We do not
guarantee any sorting order in the for-each api, do we?
-- 
Duy



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]