From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com (pb-smtp1.pobox.com [64.147.108.70]) (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 8F39B25605 for ; Fri, 12 Jan 2024 18:17:39 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=pobox.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pobox.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b="iq9W5Aat" Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC51A1C3AA5; Fri, 12 Jan 2024 13:17:37 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=+77ltJ7dvz4cQZhb3e5b1bQVsV8fM07yGFaWfX JCjNo=; b=iq9W5AatnsjUhrnbk75f3yTopTGlE0ukcsyYguANQYSptqaBsRB/jQ qHIVjNeJ8n1d3jfU87LnYasqRdW70mt01f5Ut44OgQePWqohQbec6omnV6dcFkKK fk8jwrp8ZFCCKR2SBVEe1XCt/GIeGx6IrL+GysEIIkRYB/FYqXKt0= Received: from pb-smtp1.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3F5F1C3AA4; Fri, 12 Jan 2024 13:17:37 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.125.200.93]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 43CC51C3AA3; Fri, 12 Jan 2024 13:17:37 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Jeff King Cc: Johannes Schindelin , Patrick Steinhardt , git@vger.kernel.org, Stan Hu Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] t9902: verify that completion does not print anything In-Reply-To: <20240112151655.GA640039@coredump.intra.peff.net> (Jeff King's message of "Fri, 12 Jan 2024 10:16:55 -0500") References: <73406ca9c8f38ac2ad8f0e32d6d81f1566a6b4d1.1704969119.git.ps@pks.im> <27edf445-d7fa-7aaf-7682-4ecc03366ef0@gmx.de> <20240112151655.GA640039@coredump.intra.peff.net> Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2024 10:17:36 -0800 Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: DD59AE0C-B176-11EE-A5DB-78DCEB2EC81B-77302942!pb-smtp1.pobox.com Jeff King writes: > 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. Thank you, all three of you, for digging through to the bottom quickly. I too suspected a version of bash that is ancient and found out about the "untraceable" bit just before I started reading this thread ;-)