From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B5E7EC433C1 for ; Sat, 20 Mar 2021 20:11:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91DCB6193A for ; Sat, 20 Mar 2021 20:11:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229846AbhCTULM (ORCPT ); Sat, 20 Mar 2021 16:11:12 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com ([173.228.157.52]:53965 "EHLO pb-smtp20.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229618AbhCTUKu (ORCPT ); Sat, 20 Mar 2021 16:10:50 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ADD3411FEA0; Sat, 20 Mar 2021 16:10:50 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=sasl; bh=Fj8dm7QKevu1 r+YYqIE6YsObrUM=; b=qXRo+/ek/9lyA7MGYqnFRXwXXf6MDHKbhTaxpIkvKwWa 3ncvXF/P2KAGXE8PdKvONFNoePQEnYrlAI2NlFim5pz5mt3E1vNlOs1IUcMxSrsF SC1Xjd+um9ORx8cwQSXHFLA1C1kmCBJvlVttP7N3aQvFsoeiZm33shuS0lNaCXA= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=sasl; b=RDTMPy 2M0liGpguJ2GyB3TgQSLWqTFNI6FWClmauKxCt3nIed/jM2NbBa8bbuiFBeCmpSI RmZ2XaDs0QkWjeGfDNGTYQG22cwJZ+hiion2+VHgvgQbsV4kNjmex8ojoNc2pBZO 2l/7KqNhQAKIfayQgcn3UeqI4os3QLBorp+y4= Received: from pb-smtp20.sea.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A629B11FE9F; Sat, 20 Mar 2021 16:10:50 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [35.243.138.161]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EA80B11FE9E; Sat, 20 Mar 2021 16:10:47 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: =?utf-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsA==?= Bjarmason Cc: Johannes Schindelin , Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget , git@vger.kernel.org, SZEDER =?utf-8?Q?G=C3=A1bor?= , Jeff King Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 16/21] mingw: try to work around issues with the test cleanup References: <991b41afa4a83a73f59a72504d269d64d12ecf8f.1548771561.git.gitgitgadget@gmail.com> <87zgzbgp1i.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com> <87a6qxzocs.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com> Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2021 13:10:46 -0700 In-Reply-To: <87a6qxzocs.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com> (=?utf-8?B?IsOGdmFyIEFy?= =?utf-8?B?bmZqw7Zyw7A=?= Bjarmason"'s message of "Sat, 20 Mar 2021 19:12:03 +0100") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1.90 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 5C428566-89B8-11EB-B52A-E43E2BB96649-77302942!pb-smtp20.pobox.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org =C3=86var Arnfj=C3=B6r=C3=B0 Bjarmason writes: > In any case, your patch clearly undoes whatever canary for gc issues > df4c0d1a792 was trying to put into the test-lib, but didn't say so in > its commit message. > > So I figured it was something that was missed at the time, and that I > should send a quick E-Mail to both authors to see if anyone cared, mayb= e > nobody does. > > It's just something I ran into while reviewing test-lib.sh for some > unrelated changes I was making... Good eyes. I am not quite sure if we are better off catching a transitory failure, which could go away when retried in 5 seconds, to remove the test directory (in which case, the change in question is a clear regression from what df4c0d1a (test-lib: abort when can't remove trash directory, 2017-04-20) intended to catch), or we only want to catch permanent failures (in which case the patch in question is a clear improvement). In either way, the decision and the rationale behind it should be in the log message. Thanks.