From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: t5539 broken under Mac OS X Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2015 14:39:56 -0800 Message-ID: References: <54B68D99.2040906@web.de> <54B6C897.5030405@web.de> <20150114211712.GE1155@peff.net> <064010B3-BC58-42F2-B5C0-DAADAA59B87D@gmail.com> <20150115222719.GA19021@peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Cc: "Kyle J. McKay" , Torsten =?utf-8?Q?B=C3=B6gershau?= =?utf-8?Q?sen?= , Git Mailing List To: Jeff King X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Jan 15 23:40:04 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1YBt5A-0000BP-03 for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Thu, 15 Jan 2015 23:40:04 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753394AbbAOWkA (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Jan 2015 17:40:00 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp1.int.icgroup.com ([208.72.237.35]:52816 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753086AbbAOWj7 (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Jan 2015 17:39:59 -0500 Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 647082FABE; Thu, 15 Jan 2015 17:39:58 -0500 (EST) 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; s=sasl; bh=KvmsFkx3kFsI5AbqroWUG+OV7Ow=; b=idY76a R9rE4bbFZPW50yWAwMKbG4dLe5hOyOa1Yv8MmfOTzTbJHFvPQkG9/3vidcSvdnfy sPuan/ZEzZ7WSJCMA+1/7MmRGcjUh5DntBdEmayitfZ2U/GPt0pfziVfgPdrObzy FCSwwbQ+2RqPFF7/FW1D3phVLdVFDAtYhBhwc= 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; q=dns; s=sasl; b=ieiLJ5b7YQSgAe5+2BT701ROfJxxdRqu qf8UNO6l6AgDBOTkrWCmGuvyTWkfBXFX8/lcKs7aKhNIurt/TJIrFR94OPJX6WG0 ffxc7ekPUUTOh+m1bfYsHTV2rGSmbTIOQtqiNWAZk3kY9TyHhuullj2Hzk1wvEX0 Agd6VWw18Xo= Received: from pb-smtp1.int.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5AA892FABB; Thu, 15 Jan 2015 17:39:58 -0500 (EST) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [72.14.226.9]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BF9F42FABA; Thu, 15 Jan 2015 17:39:57 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <20150115222719.GA19021@peff.net> (Jeff King's message of "Thu, 15 Jan 2015 17:27:19 -0500") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 6ED81956-9D07-11E4-9839-42529F42C9D4-77302942!pb-smtp1.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Jeff King writes: > The current scheme does not require POSIXPERM. Would this mean that > some platforms no longer runs SANITY tests (e.g., Windows)? > > Many of the SANITY-marked tests already require both, but not all. Before writing that patchlet, I briefly looked at grep output and thought that many that are protected only by SANITY lacked POSIXPERM by mistake: t/t1004-read-tree-m-u-wf.sh:test_expect_success SANITY 'funny symlink in... t/t3600-rm.sh 'Test that "git rm -f" fails if its rm fails' t/t7300-clean.sh:test_expect_success SANITY 'removal failure' ' t/t7300-clean.sh:test_expect_success SANITY 'git clean -d with an... All of the above relies on a working chmod as far as I can tell, so they should require POSIXPERM,SANITY, not just SANITY. > And > certainly lib-httpd actually cares whether you are _truly_ root, not > about weird filesystem permissions. Should lib-httpd literally be > checking the output of `id` (though I can imagine that is anything but > portable)? Even though t/README describes SANITY to require: Test is not run by root user, and an attempt to write to an unwritable file is expected to fail correctly. and it has been that way from day one, c91cfd19 (tests: A SANITY test prereq for testing if we're root, 2010-08-06) is clear that this is about "'chmod -w' is a good way to test unwritable files" lib-httpd should, if it cares about the root-ness, be checking that in a more direct way, "test_have_prereq RUNNING_AS_ROOT". Making the implementation of that portable is another matter, though.