From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
To: Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tests: prefer host Git to verify chainlint self-checks
Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2023 07:11:28 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <xmqqr0jqnnmn.fsf@gitster.g> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZXlbNlG28e1sAYPU@tanuki> (Patrick Steinhardt's message of "Wed, 13 Dec 2023 08:20:22 +0100")
Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im> writes:
>> I do not think "prefer host Git" is necessarily a good idea; falling
>> back to use host Git is perfectly fine, of course.
>
> Why is that, though?
Mostly because your "differences in features supported by just-built
one and what happens to be on $PATH can cause problems" cuts both
ways, and as a general principle to work around such issues, using
just-built one is a better discipline. The features the build
infrastructure ("self-checks" being discussed is a part of it) of a
particular version of Git source depends on are more likely to be
found in the binary that will be built from the matching source,
than what happens to be on $PATH that may be from a year-old version.
As you said, you'd need to accomodate need for those who are
initially porting or building Git on a host without an installed
one. If we were doing a cross build where just-built on would not
be executable on the host, whatever version on $PATH (or in
/usr/bin) may have to be used, but then in such a case you would not
be testing on host anyway. For these two reasons, it is a given
that one of the choices has to be to use just-built one. We can
safely give lower precedence to the host tool.
The only one-and-half practical reasons we may want to fall back to
whatever happens to be on $PATH are:
- just-built one is so broken that even the simple use by the build
infrastructure (like "self-checks") does not work (but then it
becomes "if it is so broken, fix it before even thinking about
running tests", and that is why I count it as half a reason), or
- we are bisecting down to an ancient version, and just-built one
from such a version may not understand the current repository.
so I do think it is an excellent workaround to fall back to a
version of Git with unknown vintage that happens to be on $PATH,
than failing and stopping by relying only on just-built one.
> We already use host Git in other parts of our build
> infra, and the options we pass to git-diff(1) have been around for ages:
It only argues for "trying host one, if available, before just-built
one does not hurt for this particular case". But I was interested
in laying out a more general principle we can follow in similar
situations in the future.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-12-13 15:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-12-12 11:32 [PATCH] tests: prefer host Git to verify chainlint self-checks Patrick Steinhardt
2023-12-12 19:30 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-12-13 7:20 ` Patrick Steinhardt
2023-12-13 15:11 ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2023-12-14 3:33 ` Eric Sunshine
2023-12-14 8:13 ` Patrick Steinhardt
2023-12-14 8:39 ` Eric Sunshine
2023-12-14 8:40 ` Patrick Steinhardt
2023-12-14 16:16 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-12-14 18:10 ` Eric Sunshine
2023-12-14 19:13 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-12-15 5:33 ` Patrick Steinhardt
2023-12-14 8:30 ` [PATCH v2] tests: adjust whitespace in chainlint expectations Patrick Steinhardt
2023-12-14 8:44 ` Eric Sunshine
2023-12-15 6:04 ` [PATCH v3] " Patrick Steinhardt
2023-12-15 6:24 ` Eric Sunshine
2023-12-15 6:29 ` Patrick Steinhardt
2023-12-15 6:40 ` Eric Sunshine
2023-12-15 6:42 ` [PATCH v4] " Patrick Steinhardt
2023-12-15 7:17 ` Eric Sunshine
2023-12-15 16:44 ` 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=xmqqr0jqnnmn.fsf@gitster.g \
--to=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ps@pks.im \
--cc=sunshine@sunshineco.com \
/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).