Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] vreportf: Fix interleaving issues, remove 4096 limitation

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

 



Hi Peff,

On Sat, 26 Oct 2019, Johannes Schindelin wrote:

> [...] I did open a GitGitGadget PR with my proposed change,

I should have mentioned the URL:

	https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git/pull/428

FWIW, in the meantime I managed to address below-mentioned breakages
(apart from the broken pipe problem that is discussed over here:
https://public-inbox.org/git/20190828161552.GE8571@xxxxxxxxxx/) and the
build is green.

Alex asked to be given time to brush his patch up on Monday, so I am
holding off sending my version (for now...).

Ciao,
Dscho

> in the hopes that I could somehow fast-track this fix into the
> CI/PR builds over at https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git, but there are
> problems: it seems that now there is an at least occasional broken pipe
> in the same test when run on macOS.
>
> There _also_ seems to be something spooky going on in t3510.12 and .13,
> where the expected output differs from the actual output only by a
> re-ordering of the lines:
>
> -- snip --
> [...]
> +++ diff -u expect advice
> --- expect	2019-10-25 22:17:44.982884700 +0000
> +++ advice	2019-10-25 22:17:45.278884500 +0000
> @@ -1,3 +1,3 @@
>  error: cherry-pick is already in progress
> -hint: try "git cherry-pick (--continue | --skip | --abort | --quit)"
>  fatal: cherry-pick failed
> +hint: try "git cherry-pick (--continue | --skip | --abort | --quit)"
> -- snap --
>
> For details, see:
> https://dev.azure.com/gitgitgadget/git/_build/results?buildId=19336&view=ms.vss-test-web.build-test-results-tab
> and
> https://dev.azure.com/Git-for-Windows/git/_build/results?buildId=44549&view=ms.vss-test-web.build-test-results-tab
> (You need to click on a test case title to open the logs, then inspect
> the Attachments to get to the full trace)
>
> So much as I would love to see the flakiness of t5516 be fixed as soon
> as possible, I fear we will have to look at the underlying issue a bit
> closer: there are two processes writing to `stderr` concurrently. I
> don't know whether there would be a good way for the `stderr` of the
> `upload-pack` process to be consumed by the `fetch` process, and to be
> printed by the latter.
>
> Ciao,
> 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