From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [PATCH] travis-ci: run previously failed tests first, then slowest to fastest Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 18:29:50 -0500 Message-ID: <20160119232950.GB31181@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <1453195469-51696-1-git-send-email-larsxschneider@gmail.com> <20160119230633.GA31142@sigill.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: larsxschneider@gmail.com, git@vger.kernel.org To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Jan 20 00:29:57 2016 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 1aLfin-0004PK-4s for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Wed, 20 Jan 2016 00:29:57 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933294AbcASX3y (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Jan 2016 18:29:54 -0500 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([50.56.180.127]:56568 "HELO cloud.peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S932702AbcASX3w (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Jan 2016 18:29:52 -0500 Received: (qmail 17445 invoked by uid 102); 19 Jan 2016 23:29:52 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.1) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with SMTP; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 18:29:52 -0500 Received: (qmail 27848 invoked by uid 107); 19 Jan 2016 23:30:13 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with SMTP; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 18:30:13 -0500 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Tue, 19 Jan 2016 18:29:50 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 03:26:04PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Jeff King writes: > > > You can also note that if we ever delete a test script, it will still be > > mentioned in prove's state file. I think prove is smart enough to > > realize it went away and not bother you. > > The inverse might be more problematic. When we add a new test > script (which we still do from time to time), does prove notice > that we asked it to run more tests than it already knows about? Yes. It runs the union of the state-file and what you give it on the command line. E.g.: $ rm .prove $ prove --state=slow,save t0000-basic.sh No saved state, selection will be empty t0000-basic.sh .. ok All tests successful. Files=1, Tests=77, 1 wallclock secs ( 0.03 usr 0.00 sys + 0.08 cusr 0.06 csys = 0.17 CPU) Result: PASS $ prove --state=slow,save t0001-init.sh t0000-basic.sh .. ok t0001-init.sh ... ok All tests successful. Files=2, Tests=113, 1 wallclock secs ( 0.03 usr 0.00 sys + 0.06 cusr 0.10 csys = 0.19 CPU) Result: PASS -Peff