Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes: > On Thu, Mar 28, 2024 at 09:19:08AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > >> Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes: >> >> >> With the following band-aid, we can skip the test and the output >> >> from "sh t4126-*.sh -i -v -x" might give us a clue that explains how >> >> such a failure happens. Unfortunately GitHub CI's win test does not >> >> give us insight into a test that did not fail, so I did not get >> >> anything useful from the "ls -l" down there (I already knew that >> >> sample patches are empty files). >> > >> > We package up the failed test output and trash directories for each run. >> > You can find the one for this case here: >> > >> > https://github.com/git/git/actions/runs/8458842054/artifacts/1364695605 >> >> What I meant was that with the band-aid that (1) sets prerequisite >> so that Windows would not fail and (2) has some diagnostic in the >> code that sets prerequisite, because the overall test does not fail, >> we do not package up that diagnostic output. > > Right, I meant that we could look at the run without the band-aid (which > is what the link points to). But I guess maybe you realized already that > it would not be helpful because of the "reset --hard" that the test > does. Actually, looking at the trash directory of the failed test was how "I already knew that sample patches are empty files", and my hope was that with the band-aid patch I could gather more information ;-)
