From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from cloud.peff.net (cloud.peff.net [217.216.95.84]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 866AC43F4B5 for ; Tue, 28 Jul 2026 13:55:40 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.216.95.84 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1785246942; cv=none; b=p+QjOmvOXWTlnHM4fiVUh97sKep0La3ngDYK3Jk1J83wOqk7ook6RPYFHYaXKuJh2XNKY1veDwwDc+tmChuVO9jXYA2hye5VhVYJyjrqPGpVAdcSCNmfWgZ47JHy3gyS3YZ5wu1zvm5aS4WhJTpAFHwu6GYo1lIVm/g9cGyr+w4= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1785246942; c=relaxed/simple; bh=l8HPeiBt/QyeF/GAW/kL+ywl/qGQ+8Pk4EhWopXuhzM=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=gX1dITZ1GHz3DWyQPaocL9R9hE0Az2rekNzINvsykBvdEleZdFjc2Nb4c5Arc5nVosxTPdp6hAJfUi0KUEYjuvukmX5lnEUocRiG+E+7kNsuT1rj0esGhDm6I/uT/59+RDzZhCtrQ8O39kTX21uD16gsPfsMB0ZxW/k6NCFXR70= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=peff.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=peff.net; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=peff.net header.i=@peff.net header.b=Z5v2szHr; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.216.95.84 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=peff.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=peff.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=peff.net header.i=@peff.net header.b="Z5v2szHr" Received: (qmail 80511 invoked by uid 106); 28 Jul 2026 13:55:33 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=peff.net; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version:content-type:in-reply-to; s=20240930; bh=l8HPeiBt/QyeF/GAW/kL+ywl/qGQ+8Pk4EhWopXuhzM=; b=Z5v2szHrKevduUbIepLl+OzccgPN29ISPsKb1Neqhq/0QxIrcnh5aWPLX6jEq99kGr/ToIljV/uqsVIAhKfMilvGyCpAdsKTNaY0WOyJqNnAzPTshOWIvIwB2iDC3fCyiqO8hQsnpW5TPHlejmhF4L3welD4ELGuT6CAx6uUjvdVju4JpAU47/yYMHGbCE4vPHrECV7T18gFywnMDE2NPfoRr66vLAl6woB553fUpGtuOtAp1/mJRR2V7A7T0t6n2luIH/Pe6iU0cTD3Jc6Y4hx77agODwS6bxJoYo+RJGq6sTb8VM1Zav2ISulTxbHc4PQ3Un/kuynWRmcGIjvj0w== Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.2) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with ESMTP; Tue, 28 Jul 2026 13:55:33 +0000 Authentication-Results: cloud.peff.net; auth=none Received: (qmail 99255 invoked by uid 111); 28 Jul 2026 13:55:33 -0000 Received: from coredump.intra.peff.net (HELO coredump.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.2) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with (TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Tue, 28 Jul 2026 09:55:33 -0400 Authentication-Results: peff.net; auth=none Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2026 09:55:32 -0400 From: Jeff King To: phillip.wood@dunelm.org.uk Cc: "brian m. carlson" , git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Failing tests with WITH_BREAKING_CHANGES Message-ID: <20260728135532.GA11894@coredump.intra.peff.net> References: <758dbec3-7657-4342-8b74-7e59cdf88b5e@gmail.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <758dbec3-7657-4342-8b74-7e59cdf88b5e@gmail.com> On Tue, Jul 28, 2026 at 02:31:03PM +0100, Phillip Wood wrote: > I find t1517 fails quite often for me due to cruft from a previous build > when a different branch was checked out. I wonder if there is a command that > is no-longer built by WITH_BREAKING_CHANGES whose executable still exists in > the build directory from a previous build. Its not clear to me why the alias > tests might be failing though. It's the same reason. We test looping through deprecated aliases using whatchanged and pack-redundant. When those are builtin but deprecated (like now) we allow aliases. After the breaking-changes split, those names are not special at all, and they are subject to the usual alias rules. If there is crufty git-whatchanged in your build directory, then that is an "external command" unknown to Git and you are not allowed to alias over it. The test in t0014 that covers this should be removed after the breaking changes actually land (those commands won't handled specially, so it's not different than the normal alias loop detection). But we are in a funny limbo now for WITH_BREAKING_CHANGES. Possibly we could pull the value out of GIT-BUILD-OPTIONS (which I guess happens already via the environment) and use a prereq to skip the test. -Peff