On Thu, Aug 01, 2024 at 10:04:37AM -0400, rsbecker@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > On Thursday, August 1, 2024 9:55 AM, Patrick Steinhardt wrote: > >On Thu, Aug 01, 2024 at 09:53:52AM -0400, rsbecker@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > >> On Thursday, August 1, 2024 9:50 AM, Patrick Steinhardt wrote: > >> >On Thu, Aug 01, 2024 at 09:47:38AM -0400, rsbecker@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > >> >> On Thursday, August 1, 2024 9:37 AM, Patrick Steinhardt wrote: > >> >> >As mentioned in another mail, we do not use its Makefile at all. > >> >> >Did you > >> >> check > >> >> >whether the version I have proposed here works when running `make > test`? > >> >> > >> >> That is the commit I have been trying to use. make test in clar or > git? > >> > > >> >In Git itself. `make test` builds and runs our unit tests, and that > >> >now > >> also includes > >> >unit tests based on clar with this patch series. The clar Makefile > >> >exists > >> only because I > >> >did a 1:1 import of the upstream dependency. We could just as well > >> >remove > >> it > >> >altogether, including other bits that we don't end up using. > >> > >> I see. Well, the 2.46.0 test passes. I ran 'seen' 5 days ago and > >> 'next' is going now. Would that catch it? > > > >No, as the patches in this thread are only up for discussion right now and > have not > >been merged to any of the branches. You'd have to apply them on top of > v2.46.0 > >first :) > > Do you happen to have a public fork? You can pull the branch pks-clar-unit-tests from https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/git. Patrick
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
