Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes: > ... it's much more likely that a _new_ > bug will cause one. I.e., every test we already carry is a candidate to > accidentally loop forever in this way. This is just the one we happen to > have seen. Once fixed, I don't know that it's at any more risk of > reocurring than any other problem. Thanks. This kind of perspective is why I love to have you on the list. Once said, it is so obvious but somehow I (or other people) failed to phrase it so clearly. Very much appreciated.
