Thread (13 messages) 13 messages, 4 authors, 2019-02-14

Re: [PATCH 0/2] t/lib-gpg: a gpgsm fix, a minor improvement, and a question

From: Jeff King <hidden>
Date: 2019-02-12 00:44:36

On Sat, Feb 09, 2019 at 03:06:05PM +0100, SZEDER Gábor wrote:
On Thu, Feb 07, 2019 at 10:17:44PM -0500, Todd Zullinger wrote:
quoted
Looking through the build logs for the fedora git packages, I noticed it
was missing the GPGSM prereq.
Just curious: how did you noticed the missing GPGSM prereq?

I'm asking because I use a patch for a good couple of months now that
collects the prereqs missed by test cases and prints them at the end
of 'make test'.  Its output looks like this:

  https://travis-ci.org/szeder/git/jobs/490944032#L2358

Since you seem to be interested in that sort of thing as well, perhaps
it would be worth to have something like this in git.git?  It's just
that I have been too wary of potentially annoying other contributors
by adding (what might be perceived as) clutter to their 'make test'
output :)
At first I thought your script found tests which _should_ have been
marked with a particular prereq but weren't. And I scratched my head
about how you would find that automatically. If we could, that would be
amazing. ;)

But it looks from the output like it just mentions every prereq that
wasn't satisfied. I don't think that's particularly useful to show for
all users, since most of them are platform things that cannot be changed
(and you'd never get the list to zero, since some of them are mutually
exclusive).

-Peff
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help