Re: [PATCH 1/2] t9902: verify that completion does not print anything

[Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1131 bytes --]

On Fri, Jan 12, 2024 at 10:16:55AM -0500, Jeff King wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 12, 2024 at 02:12:43PM +0100, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> 
> > But my main concern is: Why does this happen in the first place? If we are
> > running with Bash, why does `BASH_XTRACEFD` to work as intended here and
> > makes it necessary to filter out the traced commands?
> 
> BASH_XTRACEFD was introduced in bash 4.1. macOS ships with the ancient
> bash 3.2.57, which is the last GPLv2 version.
> 
> One simple solution is to mark the script with test_untraceable. See
> 5fc98e79fc (t: add means to disable '-x' tracing for individual test
> scripts, 2018-02-24) and 5827506928 (t1510-repo-setup: mark as
> untraceable with '-x', 2018-02-24).
> 
> That will disable tracing entirely in the script for older versions of
> bash, which could make debugging harder. But it will still work as
> expected for people on reasonable versions of bash, and doesn't
> introduce any complicated code.
> 
> -Peff

Ah, this is indeed the best solution. Thanks for the hints and
investigations everyone, will fix in the next iteration.

Patrick

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]