Re: regression in new built-in stash + fsmonitor (was Re: [PATCH v13 11/27] stash: convert apply to builtin)

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

 



Hi Ævar,

On Thu, 14 Mar 2019, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:

> On Tue, Feb 26 2019, Thomas Gummerer wrote:
> 
> > From: Joel Teichroeb <joel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > Add a builtin helper for performing stash commands. Converting
> > all at once proved hard to review, so starting with just apply
> > lets conversion get started without the other commands being
> > finished.
> >
> > The helper is being implemented as a drop in replacement for
> > stash so that when it is complete it can simply be renamed and
> > the shell script deleted.
> >
> > Delete the contents of the apply_stash shell function and replace
> > it with a call to stash--helper apply until pop is also
> > converted.
> 
> This
> 
>     GIT_TEST_FSMONITOR=$PWD/t7519/fsmonitor-all ./t3420-rebase-autostash.sh
> 
> Now fails, which bisects to 8a0fc8d19d ("stash: convert apply to
> builtin", 2019-02-25).
> 
> Tested on both a CentOS 6 & modern Debian testing machine:
> 
>     + git rebase -i --autostash HEAD^
>     Created autostash: 5cd734b
>     HEAD is now at 0c4d2f1 third commit
>     hint: Waiting for your editor to close the file...
>     error: There was a problem with the editor '"$FAKE_EDITOR"'.
>     Applied autostash.
>     + exit_code=1
>     + test 1 -eq 0
>     + test_match_signal 13 1
>     + test 1 = 141
>     + test 1 = 269
>     + return 1
>     + test 1 -gt 129
>     + test 1 -eq 127
>     + test 1 -eq 126
>     + return 0
>     + rm -f abort-editor.sh
>     + echo conflicting-content
>     + test_cmp expected file0
>     + diff -u expected file0
>     --- expected    2019-03-14 13:19:08.212215263 +0000
>     +++ file0       2019-03-14 13:19:08.196215250 +0000
>     @@ -1 +1 @@
>     -conflicting-content
>     +uncommitted-content
>     error: last command exited with $?=1
>     not ok 36 - autostash is saved on editor failure with conflict
> 
> Are you able to reproduce this? And if so I suggest running the test
> suite with some of the other GIT_TEST_* modes documented in
> t/README. Maybe it'll turn up something else...

Yep, totally can reproduce it :-(

I'll try to investigate a bit,
Dscho

[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]

  Powered by Linux