Re: t5601 breakage at 3cd325f7be (Merge branch 'js/protocol-advertise-multi' into pu, 2018-12-14)

["Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason" <avarab@gmail.com>]

On Fri, Dec 14 2018, Johannes Schindelin wrote:

> Hi,
>
> this morning Travis sounded quite a few claxons:
> https://travis-ci.org/git/git/builds/467839114
>
> It seems that quite a few tests in t5601-clone.sh fail, the first of which
> reading like this:
>
> -- snip --
> expecting success:
> 	git clone myhost:src ssh-clone &&
> 	expect_ssh "-o SendEnv=GIT_PROTOCOL" myhost src
>
> ++ git clone myhost:src ssh-clone
> Cloning into 'ssh-clone'...
> ++ expect_ssh '-o SendEnv=GIT_PROTOCOL' myhost src
> ++ test_when_finished '
> 		(cd "$TRASH_DIRECTORY" && rm -f ssh-expect ssh-output.munged && >ssh-output)
> 	'
> ++ test 0 = 0
> ++ test_cleanup='{
> 		(cd "$TRASH_DIRECTORY" && rm -f ssh-expect ssh-output.munged && >ssh-output)
>
> 		} && (exit "$eval_ret"); eval_ret=$?; :'
> ++ case "$#" in
> ++ echo 'ssh: -o SendEnv=GIT_PROTOCOL myhost git-upload-pack '\''src'\'''
> ++ cd '/Users/vsts/agent/2.144.0/work/1/s/t/trash directory.t5601-clone'
> ++ sed 's/ssh: -o SendEnv=GIT_PROTOCOL /ssh: /'
> ++ mv ssh-output.munged ssh-output
> ++ test_cmp ssh-expect ssh-output
> ++ diff -u ssh-expect ssh-output
> --- ssh-expect	2018-12-14 04:30:28.000000000 +0000
> +++ ssh-output	2018-12-14 04:30:28.000000000 +0000
> @@ -1 +1 @@
> -ssh: -o SendEnv=GIT_PROTOCOL myhost git-upload-pack 'src'
> +ssh: myhost git-upload-pack 'src'
> error: last command exited with $?=1
> not ok 37 - clone myhost:src uses ssh
> #
> #		git clone myhost:src ssh-clone &&
> #		expect_ssh "-o SendEnv=GIT_PROTOCOL" myhost src
> #
> -- snap --
>
> I've bisected this down to 3cd325f7be (Merge branch
> 'js/protocol-advertise-multi' into pu, 2018-12-14), a merge, meaning that
> two topic branches do not play nice with one another.
>
> Staring at the breakage and the changes involved, I suspected that
> 391985d7c7 (tests: mark & fix tests broken under
> GIT_TEST_PROTOCOL_VERSION=1, 2018-12-13) does not play well with the
> merged 24c10f7473 (protocol: advertise multiple supported versions,
> 2018-11-16), and indeed, reverting 391985d7c7 on top of 3cd325f7be lets
> t5601 pass again.
>
> It would appear to me, then, that these two patches step on each others'
> toes. Josh, Ævar, what should be done about this?

Looking at the two the breakage is on my side, but I got away with it
before. I'm re-rolling mine for this & other fixes, and will make sure
the two play well together. Thanks.