From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
To: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Cc: Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget <gitgitgadget@gmail.com>,
git@vger.kernel.org, Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im>,
Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>,
Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf: do allow `GIT_PERF_*` to be overridden again
Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2025 14:12:34 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <xmqqfri28rlp.fsf@gitster.g> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250419035407.GA93039@coredump.intra.peff.net> (Jeff King's message of "Fri, 18 Apr 2025 23:54:07 -0400")
Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:
> On Fri, Apr 04, 2025 at 10:56:07AM +0000, Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget wrote:
>
>> However, in 4638e8806e3a (Makefile: use common template for
>> GIT-BUILD-OPTIONS, 2024-12-06), a subtle change of behavior was
>> introduced: Whereas before, a couple of build-time options (the
>> `GIT_PERF_*` ones included) were written to `GIT-BUILD-OPTIONS` only
>> when their values were non-empty. With this commit, they are also
>> written when they are empty.
>
> It doesn't look like Junio picked this up, so I wanted to chime in that
> this regression bit me today, too (specifically for GIT_PERF_LARGE_REPO,
> but also another variable which I'll detail in a moment).
This was lost in the cracks. Thanks for bringing it back to our
attention. I think what happened was that I saw whack-a-mole aspect
of the root cause, which makes this "the tip of the iceberg", and
felt it was more sensible to wait before a real solution, like ...
> So I think we either need to rewrite the "run" script's fallback code,
> or teach the GIT-BUILD-OPTIONS writer to avoid mentioning unset
> variables (which is the real source of the problem in 4638e8806e3a).
... this was raised. And then I completely forgot about the topic,
as nothing happened since then.
> ...yes, this is definitely the tip of the iceberg. I don't mind doing
> this patch as an incremental step forward (and because it is an
> improvement in behavior even if 4638e8806e3a were reverted). But the
> issue is far from solved overall.
I do not mind it as an incremental band-aid.
Thanks, all.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-04-20 21:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-04-04 10:56 [PATCH] perf: do allow `GIT_PERF_*` to be overridden again Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget
2025-04-04 12:13 ` Derrick Stolee
2025-04-19 3:54 ` Jeff King
2025-04-20 21:12 ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2025-04-22 10:41 ` Jeff King
2025-04-22 15:37 ` Junio C Hamano
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=xmqqfri28rlp.fsf@gitster.g \
--to=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitgitgadget@gmail.com \
--cc=johannes.schindelin@gmx.de \
--cc=me@ttaylorr.com \
--cc=peff@peff.net \
--cc=ps@pks.im \
/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).