From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.2 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id B26B02018B for ; Mon, 18 Jul 2016 19:17:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752050AbcGRTRt (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Jul 2016 15:17:49 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com ([64.147.108.71]:64441 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751865AbcGRTRs (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Jul 2016 15:17:48 -0400 Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 659282CCEF; Mon, 18 Jul 2016 15:17:47 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=EmDYoSJ/5DIlgqWCjuKF79HEZ1c=; b=ptC3xK vrninUhHUyqLx+sCrdUEzRsLOOx679cH2IU0gRIOQtKVqj8SQAfskPba/rFur71I WzmkLoRLlm0SmLGZnws1pP7fwvWNn3cbvDPStQfvRUjSFmeTv7Dg0JNfXxDGf92t BL3jNwjrhqL6ePMgoW/xIPOLJ+ZuWFcxUS9N8= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=Pdxqo1yo+JviEhBhkqkPIsoGmRWl/Wvx tnjU4PUI76gPF3oMnlf5AAPZOMlikIhrOk5KFOiUnv6jgFLtYKrJWEV8+OnBFNZa N6bruYpUn8ODttdx1oIjF05TwWjnNcgEdupVIdrOA27CCBGOgDWTwhEhPCjbcAgZ NWY0zMTimP0= Received: from pb-smtp2.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5CCC02CCEE; Mon, 18 Jul 2016 15:17:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [104.132.0.95]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D28E02CCED; Mon, 18 Jul 2016 15:17:46 -0400 (EDT) From: Junio C Hamano To: Jeff King Cc: Johannes Schindelin , Eric Wong , =?utf-8?Q?Ren=C3=A9?= Scharfe , git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] test-lib: stricter unzip(1) check References: <20160718064431.GA10819@starla> <20160718130405.GA19751@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20160718185634.GA24726@sigill.intra.peff.net> Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2016 12:17:44 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20160718185634.GA24726@sigill.intra.peff.net> (Jeff King's message of "Mon, 18 Jul 2016 12:56:35 -0600") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 4F733B6A-4D1C-11E6-82AD-EE617A1B28F4-77302942!pb-smtp2.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Jeff King writes: > On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 11:20:19AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > >> Stepping back a bit, why do we even care if "unzip -a" works on >> "../$zipfile" and converts things correctly in that check_zip() test >> in t5003 in the first place? It looks more like a test on "unzip" >> than making sure we correctly generate a zip archive to me... > > I think it is testing that we generated an archive with the correct "I > am text" flags so that an unzip implementation can do the > auto-conversion. Yes, I understand that. I was hoping for a response along the lines of "we want to make sure we mark text as text, and 'zip -l' has an option to let us check the attributes without having to actually checking things out" ;-)