On 2020-07-11 at 00:37:14, Junio C Hamano wrote: > I do not think it was an explicit objective for Denton's series to > catch the use of test_might_fail with test_cmp specifically, but I > offhand do not think of a good use case for saying "expect and > actual may sometimes be the same, but they may be different", so in > that sense, it contributed to find a nonsensical code. I haven't > read thru all the 38 patches of this series, so there may be an > obvious reason why we may want to have such a thing expressed that I > am missing, though... As mentioned upthread, my patch is definitely not correct. I've squashed in a fix to remove the test_might_fail and will send out a reroll later this weekend. I want to wait a little bit in case anyone has immediate comments on things so as not to send out patches too frequently. If the breakage is bothersome for you, please feel free to just remove those test_might_fail entries in the meantime, and the series should function correctly. -- brian m. carlson: Houston, Texas, US
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
