On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 02:13:13PM -0800, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > So the idea if I am reading correctly is "Instead of relying on the > implicit output directory chosen with chdir, which doesn't even work > any more, set TEST_OUTPUT_DIRECTORY to decide where output for the > sub-tests used by t0000's sanity checks for the test harness go".
Right. > I'm not sure I completely understand the regression caused by 38b074d. > Is the idea that before that commit, TEST_OUTPUT_DIRECTORY was only > used for the test-results/ directory so the only harm done was some > mixing of test results? $TEST_OUTPUT_DIRECTORY was actually used in $TRASH_DIRECTORY, but some code paths properly used $TRASH_DIRECTORY, and some used another variable that (sometimes) contained a relative form of $TRASH_DIRECTORY. The creation of the repo was one such code-path. So there were already potentially problems before 38b074d (any sub-test looking at its $TRASH_DIRECTORY variable would find the wrong path), but I do not know offhand if it could trigger any bugs. Post-38b074d, we consistently use $TRASH_DIRECTORY (and therefore respect $TEST_OUTPUT_DIRECTORY) everywhere. > What is the symptom this patch alleviates? > > > As a result, t0000's sub-tests are now created in git's > > original test output directory rather than in our trash > > directory. > > This might be the source of my confusion. Is "sub-tests" an > abbreviation for "sub-test trash directories" here? Yes, I should have said "sub-test trash directories". And I think that answers your "what is the symptom" question. > > We could fix this by passing a new "--root=$TRASH_DIRECTORY" > > option to the sub-test. However, we do not want the sub-tests > > to write anything at all to git's directory (e.g., they > > should not be writing to t/test-results, either, although > > this is already handled by separate code). > > Ah, HARNESS_ACTIVE prevents output of test-results. Yes. My original notion was "Oh, and this fixes broken test-results, too!". But then I noticed that it is already handled in a different way. :) > Does the git test harness write something else to > TEST_OUTPUT_DIRECTORY? Is the idea that using --root would be > functionally equivalent but (1) more confusing and (2) less > futureproof? Exactly. I do not think TEST_OUTPUT_DIRECTORY is used for anything else, but if someone were to ever add a new use, the sub-tests would almost certainly want that use to affect only the t0000 trash directory. > So, to sum up: if I understand correctly You answered these yourself in your follow-up. :) > So the patch itself looks right. I think describing the symptoms up > front would probably be enough to make the commit message less > confusing to read. Would adding the missing "trash directories" wording above be sufficient? -Peff -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
