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 93CE6C636CD for ; Fri, 10 Feb 2023 17:31:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S232929AbjBJRbK (ORCPT ); Fri, 10 Feb 2023 12:31:10 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:40394 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231889AbjBJRbJ (ORCPT ); Fri, 10 Feb 2023 12:31:09 -0500 Received: from mail-pg1-x531.google.com (mail-pg1-x531.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::531]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C4C217359C for ; Fri, 10 Feb 2023 09:31:06 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-pg1-x531.google.com with SMTP id n3so4171809pgr.9 for ; Fri, 10 Feb 2023 09:31:06 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:user-agent:message-id :in-reply-to:date:references:subject:cc:to:from:sender:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=em1/LMK/xwyQS+AwqjrHRoaM5iI/rLs2FzrjULRDAc0=; b=J9cqu5pfef53xFhhc/WWtGha/VvYiUKyw3vOFHGcjcwh8jc0OdxIrZxl4+GmHAs+GO VurjyC5Z0WMTVcFvvh5CBnSknlsOyV+sWYpVzrKRmLoydnhqMZmQCZDy9/F1VUwl4Kh0 8hsdgOwkWXrTsWNL9Qv6B5igp09lsfqgxdanOiQFpVrZ4KPQGR9JRUdWzRhd2ip2BPxg PfOiu7ICuUGK5uETFImOBsOBFwyL4aWNoT30K5MRkY+HLJ3qTF+7LDBUzpTymbrStXWI VofYKnaT+hEU66YrS1Nk9ywI2QunKX0OkEqRA/SfbKQznRFU3oJPbVx59m8A94um843l BSvA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:user-agent:message-id :in-reply-to:date:references:subject:cc:to:from:sender :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=em1/LMK/xwyQS+AwqjrHRoaM5iI/rLs2FzrjULRDAc0=; b=WloELyKGhTKGQ2sy+v3p3r9/tVacJ8QtiWAMz7z7WDKinEg+wwrX+FSAZgX/cL00Is MVhok7qDNMfStVHSxEyPwR6+ZgDWJKNWIhTpPNZ25vgEV3jzpxHoUFytD+qpZFDhcxGy BTeQfEwIBY2M+FUM5jaZJxgmxoxXyKHuubSBQToBlDbY6vN3MQx1dqlKAZ2EFVm8vF+B 2H3BnjdcJghIdAXvo2tC8w6jN/hvySbdiAs71y3O3NqyO9gRgVDTC9Nj/++PIAldBxOo g5gkOF+upUV1IWpXCTekmEsAGWEdVgpbgVnDon4Myc6BTYQuCwNmPSADuFSEscWu5WgR lELQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AO0yUKV+/LIHkbxMvIIrOAPxZPHJZ2k7bdLwmpZAMlT1qtpzLT5yEgir +hGcjkluWp2Kg6TVT4kVa2wuK5kcQSI= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AK7set+coBrxuYal1Hop63jRqkwb3gZUu45+v7PIYpmsjBTR/kUFfCY/Qt86frenrr9lcCvTEyWyEw== X-Received: by 2002:a62:164b:0:b0:5a8:5247:2593 with SMTP id 72-20020a62164b000000b005a852472593mr6023462pfw.28.1676050266114; Fri, 10 Feb 2023 09:31:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (252.157.168.34.bc.googleusercontent.com. [34.168.157.252]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id m6-20020aa78a06000000b005772d55df03sm3553801pfa.35.2023.02.10.09.31.05 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 10 Feb 2023 09:31:05 -0800 (PST) Sender: Junio C Hamano From: Junio C Hamano To: Johannes Schindelin Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, =?utf-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsA==?= Bjarmason Subject: Re: [PATCH] test: make SYMLINKS prerequisite more robust References: <230209.86k00rzqsz.gmgdl@evledraar.gmail.com> Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2023 09:31:05 -0800 In-Reply-To: (Junio C. Hamano's message of "Wed, 08 Feb 2023 17:56:59 -0800") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Junio C Hamano writes: > Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason writes: > >>> I wonder if something like this is in order? >> >> I don't have much to contribute on that front, but this is really >> missing some "why", this worked before, why is it failing now? Do we >> have any idea. > > Your guess is as good as mine. I do not do Windows. This morning, I notice that those CI jobs I ran last night that failed with "whoa, windows tests are somehow reporting that symlinks are available but not really" issue the patch in this thread were attempting to address has passed even for branches like 'master' and 'next' that do not yet have it, and it seems to be because you re-run these failed jobs. Whatever magic you used to fix these failing tests, thanks. Do you have an insight on why and how these were failing? The patch in this thread was a band-aid without knowing why all of a sudden "ln -s x y && test -h y" started passing (while compat/mingw.c still says readlink() is not supported). If we know that such a breakage is not expected, we can drop this workaroun, which would be great. Thanks.