Santiago Torres <santiago@xxxxxxx> writes: > Other projects such as notmuch opted for a solution that's simlar to > what I had suggested[1], but I wonder if it's even necessary to do. > There is already a fix on the master branch of gnupg[2], which I imagine > will show up to the next version of gpg2. > > I don't think it would make sense to fix anything on our side, unless we > want to be extra sure the test suite is not leaking agents for all gpg > versions (including these minor versions). I am not sure if it is merely "if it's even necessary"; if there are two tests running in parallel, with their own separate $TRASH_DIRECTORY, and one of them say "kill the agent" at the beginning, would it affect the other test, depending on the timing? I would imagine that the sockets are kept per GNUPGHOME and they are not going to interfere, so if that is the case, I do not think we mind helping folks with a buggy versions of GnuPG by having a "let's be cautious and kill a leftover agent before starting to test" patch, as long as the reason why we do so is clearly understood and documented. Thanks for digging it to the root cause.
