Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > Karthik Nayak <karthik.188@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > >> Overall, this series is a bit more involved, and I would appreciate it >> if it receives a bit more scrutiny. >> >> The series is based on top of e66fd72e97 (The fourteenth batch, >> 2024-12-06) with `kn/reftable-writer-log-write-verify` merged in. > > t1460.6 does not pass for me. I noticed it after I merged it to > 'seen', but it fails standalone as well. > Thanks Junio, seems like this passes on GCC and that is what I was using. Sadly, it also passes on older clang version, which is what the CI uses. Unfortunately I assumed that the CI passing [1] should be validation enough. But I can indeed reproduce this locally with clang. Patrick posted a fix on the list [1] and also discovered one more while we were discussing off the list. I'll send in the next version with both of those included once I validate all the tests once more. [1]: https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/git/-/pipelines/1589854339 [2]: https://lore.kernel.org/r/Z1_KzlKc7RBfas4L@xxxxxx [snip]
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
