"D. Ben Knoble" <ben.knoble@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > "D. Ben Knoble" <ben.knoble@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> CI for an i18n PR [1] is failing on freebsd12, but I cannot reproduce >> it. Is this known (a search of archives and the master branch doesn't >> reveal anything)? >> >> Summary output: >> >> Test Summary Report >> ------------------- >> t2400-worktree-add.sh (Wstat: 256 Tests: >> 227 Failed: 27) >> Failed tests: 50-52, 91-93, 107-109, 123-125, 139-141 >> 159-161, 175-177, 191-193, 207-209 >> Non-zero exit status: 1 >> >> Proximate log entry: >> >> [16:19:43] t2400-worktree-add.sh .............................. >> Dubious, test returned 1 (wstat 256, 0x100) >> Failed 27/227 subtests Those listed in https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git/actions do not seem to even run Cirrus CI. Perhaps GitGitGadget folks wanted to make sure that changes that may break FreeBSD will not escape to the public list, and added it as an extra for pull requests? The runs shown at the end of PR in https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git/pulls however do run Cirrus CI and some, but not all, of them do fail. Given that the tests seem to randomly fail, I can believe if this is due to a flakey test that needs to be fixed, but from what we can see in the webpage of Cirrus CI, I cannot even guess what the problem is. I do not offhand know how well the FreeBSD port has been maintained, or those who have (or had once in the past) stake in it are keeping an eye on it. Anybody? > Bump: this bug seems to affect several GitGitGadget PRs in CI, which > also renders GGG unusable for sending mail, IIUC. By the way, is this really "blocking" use of GGG in any way? I do recall seeing messages regarding gitk from Jens Lidestrom that are shown in https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git/pull/1551 but the CI run report at the end of that page does have a failing CirrusCI.
