On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 4:54 PM, Lars Schneider <larsxschneider@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> Am 20.04.2017 um 23:58 schrieb Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@xxxxxxxxx>: >> >> As a refresh of everyone's memory (because mine needed it). This is a >> feature I added back in 2011 when the i18n support was initially >> added. >> >> There was concern at the time that we would inadvertently mark >> plumbing messages for translation, particularly something in a shared >> code path, and this was a way to hopefully smoke out those issues with >> the test suite. >> >> However compiling with it breaks a couple of dozen tests, I stopped >> digging when I saw some broke back in 2014. >> >> What should be done about this? I think if we're going to keep them >> they need to be run regularly by something like Travis (Lars CC'd), >> however empirical evidence suggests that not running them is just fine >> too, so should we just remove support for this test mode? > > Right now we are building and testing Git in the following configurations: > > 1. Linux, gcc, stable Perforce an GitLFS version (used by git-p4 tests) > 2. Linux, gcc, stable Perforce an GitLFS version (used by git-p4 tests) * > 3. OSX, clang, latest Perforce an GitLFS version (used by git-p4 tests) > 4. OSX, clang, latest Perforce an GitLFS version (used by git-p4 tests) * > 5. Linux32, gcc, no git-p4 tests > 6. Windows, gcc, no git-p4 tests > > 1-4 run the same tests right now. This was especially useful in the beginning to identify flaky tests (t0025 is still flaky!). > > We could easily run the tests in 1-4 with different configurations. E.g. enable GETTEXT_POISON in 2. > > Cheers, > Lars > > *) 2 and 4 use the wrong compiler right now. 2 should use clang on Linux and 4 should use gcc. A patch is on my todo list. Great, thanks. I'll fixup the poison tests then.