From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0FB78C433FE for ; Sun, 23 Oct 2022 20:56:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229519AbiJWU4L (ORCPT ); Sun, 23 Oct 2022 16:56:11 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:34524 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229619AbiJWU4J (ORCPT ); Sun, 23 Oct 2022 16:56:09 -0400 Received: from cloud.peff.net (cloud.peff.net [104.130.231.41]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D2AAF48A35 for ; Sun, 23 Oct 2022 13:56:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 31171 invoked by uid 109); 23 Oct 2022 20:56:02 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.2) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with ESMTP; Sun, 23 Oct 2022 20:56:02 +0000 Authentication-Results: cloud.peff.net; auth=none Received: (qmail 26078 invoked by uid 111); 23 Oct 2022 20:56:00 -0000 Received: from coredump.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.2) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with (TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Sun, 23 Oct 2022 16:56:00 -0400 Authentication-Results: peff.net; auth=none Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2022 16:55:59 -0400 From: Jeff King To: Junio C Hamano Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Jan =?utf-8?Q?Pokorn=C3=BD?= , Taylor Blau Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/5] repack: use tempfiles for signal cleanup Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Sun, Oct 23, 2022 at 11:08:26AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Jeff King writes: > > > Here's a patch on top of of jk/repack-tempfile-cleanup that adjusts the > > test (and should make the immediate racy CI pain go away). It gives some > > explanation why the third option isn't as interesting as you'd think. If > > somebody later wants to add such a "pack-objects died" error, we can > > adjust sigpipe handling there. > > An extremely simplified alternative would be just to say ! instead > of test_must_fail, which essentially is ok=anycrash ;-) I would have been tempted to do that if we hadn't already added ok=sigpipe long ago. :) > I did try the same exact patch before going to bed last night but > t7700 somehow failed some other steps in my local tests and I gave > up digging further X-<. One step at a time... Hopefully not my bits. :) FWIW, the tips of "master", "next", and "seen" all pass just fine for me (minus this race on seen). -Peff