Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > Change the BUG() function invoked be "test-tool" to be the "real" one, > instead of one that avoids producing core files. In > a86303cb5d5 (test-tool: help verifying BUG() code paths, 2018-05-02) > to test the (then recently added) BUG() function we faked up the > abort() in favor of an exit with code 99. > > However, in doing so we've been fooling ourselves when it comes to > what trace2 events we log. The events tested for in > 0a9dde4a04c (usage: trace2 BUG() invocations, 2021-02-05) are not the > real ones, but those that we emit only from the "test-tool". I can fully agree with the above reasoning, i.e. let's test what we do use in production, instead of something nobody uses for real, if we were adding a test for BUG() in vacuum, but why did we have to "fake" it in the first place? > Let's just stop faking it, and call abort(). As a86303cb5d5 notes this > will produce core files on some OS's, but as the default behavior for > that is to dump them in the current directory they'll be placed in the > trash directory that we'll shortly me "rm -rf"-ing. Are we sure that the reason no longer applies? How do we know? We would want to explain that to future developers in the proposed log message, I would think. > + elif test_match_signal 6 $exit_code && list_contains "$_test_ok" sigabrt > + then > + return 0 > elif test_match_signal 13 $exit_code && list_contains "$_test_ok" sigpipe Not a new problem, but these numberings are probably not very portable. I am willing to take this as-is and let people on minority platforms complain ;-)
