From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
To: "John Cai via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@gmail.com>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, John Cai <johncai86@gmail.com>
Subject: (RFH Windows breakage) Re: [PATCH 0/3] Remove is_bare_repository_cfg global state
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2024 08:09:45 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <xmqqzfl1hl52.fsf@gitster.g> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <pull.1826.git.git.1730926082.gitgitgadget@gmail.com> (John Cai via GitGitGadget's message of "Wed, 06 Nov 2024 20:47:59 +0000")
"John Cai via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@gmail.com> writes:
> This patch series removes the global state introduced by the
> is_bare_repository_cfg variable by moving it into the repository struct.
> Most of the refactor is done by patch 1. Patch 2 initializes the member in
> places that left it unInitialized, while patch 3 adds a safety measure by
> BUG()ing when the variable has not been properly initialized.
>
> John Cai (3):
> git: remove is_bare_repository_cfg global variable
> setup: initialize is_bare_cfg
> repository: BUG when is_bare_cfg is not initialized
We've been seeing a job "win test (5)" fail on 'seen' for a while,
and I happened to have rebuilt 'seen' without this topic (first by
accident) and the job started passing.
The topic coming from GGG, I'd assume that it byitself will pass the
tests (including Windows ones), so I suspect it is some interaction
with other topics in 'seen'.
As I do not have Windows environment to test and dig into any
problem, often pushing 'seen' with suspect topic(s) removed is the
only way for me to isolate which topic might be causing a problem,
and after doing so, I'll have to leave it up to the author of the
topic to dig further with help from others.
(failing) https://github.com/git/git/actions/runs/12279217687/job/34263221584
(passing) https://github.com/git/git/actions/runs/12286174648/job/34286039276
The difference between these is that the former (failing) one has
this topic with three patches merged at the tip of 'seen', and the
latter (passing) one is the result of tentatively dropping this
topic from the CI run.
Thanks.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-12-11 23:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-11-06 20:47 [PATCH 0/3] Remove is_bare_repository_cfg global state John Cai via GitGitGadget
2024-11-06 20:48 ` [PATCH 1/3] git: remove is_bare_repository_cfg global variable John Cai via GitGitGadget
2024-11-07 5:46 ` Junio C Hamano
2024-11-07 16:04 ` shejialuo
2024-11-08 1:24 ` Junio C Hamano
2024-11-16 12:09 ` shejialuo
2024-11-06 20:48 ` [PATCH 2/3] setup: initialize is_bare_cfg John Cai via GitGitGadget
2024-11-07 6:25 ` Junio C Hamano
2024-11-06 20:48 ` [PATCH 3/3] repository: BUG when is_bare_cfg is not initialized John Cai via GitGitGadget
2024-11-26 8:08 ` [PATCH 0/3] Remove is_bare_repository_cfg global state Junio C Hamano
2024-12-11 23:09 ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
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=xmqqzfl1hl52.fsf@gitster.g \
--to=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitgitgadget@gmail.com \
--cc=johncai86@gmail.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).