From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
To: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org,
"Johannes Schindelin" <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>,
"René Scharfe" <l.s.r@web.de>, "Johannes Sixt" <j6t@kdbg.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] archive-tar: huge offset and future timestamps would not work on 32-bit
Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2016 18:20:47 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160714222047.GA21868@sigill.intra.peff.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160714204357.2628-3-gitster@pobox.com>
On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 01:43:57PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> As we are not yet moving everything to size_t but still using ulong
> internally when talking about the size of object, platforms with
> 32-bit long will not be able to produce tar archive with 4GB+ file,
> and cannot grok 077777777777UL as a constant. Disable the extended
> header feature and do not test it on them.
I tried testing this in a VM with 32-bit Debian. It fixes the build
problems, but t5000 still fails.
I think you need to add the prereq to one more test:
diff --git a/t/t5000-tar-tree.sh b/t/t5000-tar-tree.sh
index 699355b..80b2387 100755
--- a/t/t5000-tar-tree.sh
+++ b/t/t5000-tar-tree.sh
@@ -347,7 +347,7 @@ test_lazy_prereq TAR_HUGE '
test_cmp expect actual
'
-test_expect_success 'set up repository with huge blob' '
+test_expect_success LONG_IS_64BIT 'set up repository with huge blob' '
obj_d=19 &&
obj_f=f9c8273ec45a8938e6999cb59b3ff66739902a &&
obj=${obj_d}${obj_f} &&
We shouldn't be accessing the blob in update-index, but I think "git
commit" does so for the diff (and then after seeing the size says
"whoops, that's binary", but even the size check fails on 32-bit
systems).
So another solution would be to use "commit -q" at the end of that test.
I don't think there's much point, though; it's just setting up a state
for other tests that need LONG_IS_64BIT.
As an aside, it is inadvertently testing that our diff code does not
bother to read the whole blob in such a case. Which maybe argues for
using "commit -q", just because that is not a thing we are intending to
test here.
-Peff
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-07-14 22:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 42+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-06-30 9:06 [PATCH v4 0/5] friendlier handling of overflows in archive-tar Jeff King
2016-06-30 9:07 ` [PATCH v4 1/5] t9300: factor out portable "head -c" replacement Jeff King
2016-07-01 4:45 ` Eric Sunshine
2016-07-01 17:23 ` Junio C Hamano
2016-07-01 18:01 ` Jeff King
2016-06-30 9:08 ` [PATCH v4 2/5] t5000: test tar files that overflow ustar headers Jeff King
2016-07-14 15:47 ` Johannes Schindelin
2016-07-14 16:45 ` Johannes Sixt
2016-07-14 17:08 ` Junio C Hamano
2016-07-14 20:52 ` Johannes Sixt
2016-07-14 21:32 ` Jeff King
2016-07-14 22:30 ` Junio C Hamano
2016-07-14 22:38 ` Jeff King
2016-07-15 13:37 ` Torsten Bögershausen
2016-07-15 13:46 ` Jeff King
2016-07-14 22:26 ` Junio C Hamano
2016-07-14 18:24 ` Jeff King
2016-07-14 18:21 ` Jeff King
2016-07-14 20:00 ` Junio C Hamano
2016-07-14 20:03 ` Junio C Hamano
2016-07-14 20:14 ` Jeff King
2016-07-14 20:09 ` Junio C Hamano
2016-07-14 20:10 ` Jeff King
2016-07-14 20:22 ` Junio C Hamano
2016-07-14 20:27 ` Jeff King
2016-07-14 20:34 ` Junio C Hamano
2016-07-14 20:43 ` [PATCH v2 0/2] ulong may only be 32-bit wide Junio C Hamano
2016-07-14 20:43 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] t0006: skip "far in the future" test when unsigned long is not long enough Junio C Hamano
2016-07-14 20:43 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] archive-tar: huge offset and future timestamps would not work on 32-bit Junio C Hamano
2016-07-14 22:20 ` Jeff King [this message]
2016-07-14 22:36 ` Junio C Hamano
2016-07-16 6:28 ` Duy Nguyen
2016-07-15 15:10 ` [PATCH v4 2/5] t5000: test tar files that overflow ustar headers Johannes Schindelin
2016-07-15 16:49 ` Junio C Hamano
2016-06-30 9:09 ` [PATCH v4 3/5] archive-tar: write extended headers for file sizes >= 8GB Jeff King
2016-07-14 16:48 ` Johannes Sixt
2016-07-14 17:11 ` Junio C Hamano
2016-07-14 18:16 ` Jeff King
2016-07-15 2:59 ` Torsten Bögershausen
2016-06-30 9:09 ` [PATCH v4 4/5] archive-tar: write extended headers for far-future mtime Jeff King
2016-06-30 9:09 ` [PATCH v4 5/5] archive-tar: drop return value Jeff King
2016-06-30 9:14 ` [PATCH v4 6/5] t5000: use test_match_signal Jeff King
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20160714222047.GA21868@sigill.intra.peff.net \
--to=peff@peff.net \
--cc=Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=j6t@kdbg.org \
--cc=l.s.r@web.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).