From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from fout-a5-smtp.messagingengine.com (fout-a5-smtp.messagingengine.com [103.168.172.148]) (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 63C582206A2 for ; Fri, 18 Apr 2025 18:12:11 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=103.168.172.148 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1744999934; cv=none; b=AzvBzjJB3LW8ULIkpYCgXv/PzLWgRn5zcrAidX+gVnEUOkeuYZIw/w/Kd27Ty14cww0/84JREe+RMdJcTBkXYvnB52mhz/ZWbdANYzS8uR6AB8nsmaL0hapWSKPUATGYITq3gB4XoB8q1Y+I7m6mQkIhf5uOxRVajcz643mjI5I= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1744999934; c=relaxed/simple; bh=Z6iq/2nfDJJjjqDCR1Z+a0/E0G5LzHtfAVz3A9taK2U=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=H6fxsY9VmU4Tc9/JdtG5LnBqHkCobXqzCfX6PkO/lHqqBRffDo1nOWN3byQWH4OdtsOAiG/g//DvUmKYXhUAgylGiwMDa4VbYsxWZ+x4r6K2GNYlfGwwVN+WRZZTkCLa17S/X0N1nPIyad7aDY8Osdlc/AxX1GUhhcR92AHXuTU= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=pobox.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pobox.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b=XIR8qgYh; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b=AU5L69x3; arc=none smtp.client-ip=103.168.172.148 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 (2048-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b="XIR8qgYh"; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b="AU5L69x3" Received: from phl-compute-03.internal (phl-compute-03.phl.internal [10.202.2.43]) by mailfout.phl.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C4B31380462; Fri, 18 Apr 2025 14:12:10 -0400 (EDT) Received: from phl-frontend-01 ([10.202.2.160]) by phl-compute-03.internal (MEProxy); Fri, 18 Apr 2025 14:12:10 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=cc :cc:content-type:content-type:date:date:from:from:in-reply-to :in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject :subject:to:to; s=fm1; t=1744999930; x=1745086330; bh=s7xdEHabDG 0tqoQOHRtCeElQunWRE0nJW6vQ8NGE2jA=; b=XIR8qgYhgiwano2nLh0c/mFA7w kPwapjkokm6K/D7U1d3LM+NmQfo+zaCey9eyRHQxfx/0l6FKUCO6nBupnaRiZIEf bihizHeQAAWL+l3JpFRJkqAzn1odZQmIlVu1GGqHCBQlxAUqwaeA+97k7ysVa0ub 1kx0oOJqVsaw0ucVyOFYfhYV4AIcDG3WKePYokpkvHxIB3BFTJjtx9uYL2IYRN+G JPhLT4M9Mu1Rk5Nj8AxzCznHR5DmcMXYmlyPl4ZPCI+aq7L4FfZIKadi6XJH6+GS tZ6xmzc/zbe+cMxmTzVmzawMKhxShPLD9RkUqO9EE8ArafFv8f+0R0V5a/pQ== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-type:content-type:date:date :feedback-id:feedback-id:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject:subject:to :to:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; t= 1744999930; x=1745086330; bh=s7xdEHabDG0tqoQOHRtCeElQunWRE0nJW6v Q8NGE2jA=; b=AU5L69x3P0LZnh+QYVR0rGsqxUzj8Lf5J148LstkO7LYDegpxoV BJJqJ6lEsN9XeBfRD8N8wlNqGIs5B0iMZ9S40dMbWgLFhPMtd9F9WaXbnfj2k5Xs NXZQ3NIS8q9HX+FP/pW71dHiMa70Vk2pv3kJhgLsjCnZmJ1Y5WCGJPwbDpW59pIo 5QErdi9c5GrF6+TxTwmhp0ERy8lGffrGzXRrGq/GbQg5hW7TFRhAkpWUlWO8pkVU obpmKaKu5eQI0QUYVhoe1PXD6g0+Ke90JE+SS7KxUOBbopjehG8D+O4tf7LdL+/U BusWLJyjwn/VGzpFyKexvhrLOS4YchJN/fA== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeefvddrtddtgddvfedvkeegucetufdoteggodetrf dotffvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdggtfgfnhhsuhgsshgtrhhisggv pdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgenuceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpih gvnhhtshculddquddttddmnecujfgurhephffvvefujghffffkfgggtgesthdtredttder tdenucfhrhhomheplfhunhhiohcuvecujfgrmhgrnhhouceoghhithhsthgvrhesphhosg hogidrtghomheqnecuggftrfgrthhtvghrnhepffeiteeujeevfeehuddvjeduffeijeeg fefhtddvkeefjeejhedtgeefgfeijedtnecuffhomhgrihhnpehgihhthhhusgdrtghomh enucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehgihht shhtvghrsehpohgsohigrdgtohhmpdhnsggprhgtphhtthhopeelpdhmohguvgepshhmth hpohhuthdprhgtphhtthhopegrnhhthhhonhihfigrnhhghedufeesghhmrghilhdrtgho mhdprhgtphhtthhopehgihhtsehvghgvrhdrkhgvrhhnvghlrdhorhhgpdhrtghpthhtoh eprghnthhhohhnhiifrghnghdtfeesihgtlhhouhgurdgtohhmpdhrtghpthhtoheptghh rhhishhtihgrnhdrtghouhguvghrsehgmhgrihhlrdgtohhmpdhrtghpthhtohepkhgrrh hthhhikhdrudekkeesghhmrghilhdrtghomhdprhgtphhtthhopehpshesphhkshdrihhm pdhrtghpthhtohepshhhvghjihgrlhhuohesghhmrghilhdrtghomhdprhgtphhtthhope hshhihrghmthhhrghkkhgrrhdttddusehgmhgrihhlrdgtohhmpdhrtghpthhtohepghhi thhsthgvrhesphhosghogidrtghomh X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: if26b431b:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Fri, 18 Apr 2025 14:12:09 -0400 (EDT) From: Junio C Hamano To: Anthony Wang Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, anthonywang03@icloud.com, christian.couder@gmail.com, karthik.188@gmail.com, ps@pks.im, shejialuo@gmail.com, shyamthakkar001@gmail.com Subject: Re: [GSoC] [PATCH v7 1/1] t9811: be more precise to check importing of tags In-Reply-To: <20250416145939.24207-2-anthonywang03@icloud.com> (Anthony Wang's message of "Wed, 16 Apr 2025 16:59:39 +0200") References: <20250405103718.25160-1-anthonywang03@icloud.com> <20250416145939.24207-1-anthonywang03@icloud.com> <20250416145939.24207-2-anthonywang03@icloud.com> Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2025 11:12:08 -0700 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 Anthony Wang writes: > Additionally, we add a negative test to verify that a possible > uninteded tag does not show up in the imported repository. With this we tightened the tests to insist that TAG_F1_ONLY does not exist, but it seems that our CI tests at least on macos seems to think that the tag should exist. https://github.com/git/git/actions/runs/14526556144/job/40759116464#step:4:1944 > + git show-ref --verify refs/tags/TAG_F1_1 && > + git show-ref --verify refs/tags/TAG_F1_2 && > + test_must_fail git show-ref --verify refs/tags/TAG_F1_ONLY && And because of that, this third line which does not correspond to any tests in the original makes the thing fail. I think negative test was what I suggested, but I didn't know if that particular tag used for the negative test should or should not exist in the test at that point (I do not do Perforce, so I still do not know the answer to that question; in any case, due to lack of p4 in my environment, my local testing did not catch this breakage). Sorry about the confusion. Let's add this on top. -- >8 ---- >8 ---- >8 -- Subject: [PATCH] t9811: fix misconversion of test The previous commit started to insist TAG_F1_ONLY to be missing, which was not in the original. Let's not to be overly eager in the conversion. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano --- t/t9811-git-p4-label-import.sh | 1 - 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/t/t9811-git-p4-label-import.sh b/t/t9811-git-p4-label-import.sh index 39856629c0..9637a46d6f 100755 --- a/t/t9811-git-p4-label-import.sh +++ b/t/t9811-git-p4-label-import.sh @@ -97,7 +97,6 @@ test_expect_success 'two labels on the same changelist' ' git show-ref --verify refs/tags/TAG_F1_1 && git show-ref --verify refs/tags/TAG_F1_2 && - test_must_fail git show-ref --verify refs/tags/TAG_F1_ONLY && cd main && -- 2.49.0-524-g64a58d64d1