Hi, On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 2:45 PM, Totsten Bögershausen <tboegi@xxxxxx> wrote: > On 2018-04-26 19:23, Elijah Newren wrote: >> Sure. First, though, note that I can make it pass (or at least "not >> ok...TODO known breakage") with the following patch (may be >> whitespace-damaged by gmail): >> >> diff --git a/t/test-lib.sh b/t/test-lib.sh >> index 483c8d6d7..770b91f8c 100644 >> --- a/t/test-lib.sh >> +++ b/t/test-lib.sh >> @@ -1106,12 +1106,7 @@ test_lazy_prereq UTF8_NFD_TO_NFC ' >> auml=$(printf "\303\244") >> aumlcdiar=$(printf "\141\314\210") >> >"$auml" && >> - case "$(echo *)" in >> - "$aumlcdiar") >> - true ;; >> - *) >> - false ;; >> - esac >> + stat "$aumlcdiar" >/dev/null 2>/dev/null > > > Nicely analyzed and improved. > > The "stat" statement is technically correct. > I think that a more git-style fix would be > [] --- > + test -r "$aumlcdiar" > > instead of the stat. > > I looked into the 2 known breakages. > In short: they test use cases which are not sooo important for a user in > practice, but do a good test if the code is broken. > IOW: I can't see a need for immediate action. > > As you already did all the analyzes: > Do you want to send a patch ? You know, despite seeing the "test_expect_failure" and "TODO...known breakage" with these tests and even mentioning them, it somehow didn't sink in and I was still thinking that there might be some kind of unicode normalization handling in the codebase somewhere (similar to the case insensitivy handling that I've seen in a place or two) that now needed to be extended. I should have realized that test_expect_failure meant there wasn't, and thus all we needed to do was to mark it as continuing to fail with the new filesystem, Should have realized, but didn't. Oops. Anyway, it looks like you've already submitted a patch and marked it as having been reported by me, which is just fine. Thanks! Elijah
