From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 Received: from out1.vger.email (out1.vger.email [IPv6:2620:137:e000::1:20]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB2951F428 for ; Sat, 25 Mar 2023 08:05:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229674AbjCYIE5 (ORCPT ); Sat, 25 Mar 2023 04:04:57 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:47154 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229481AbjCYIE4 (ORCPT ); Sat, 25 Mar 2023 04:04:56 -0400 Received: from cloud.peff.net (cloud.peff.net [104.130.231.41]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 13B246EB1 for ; Sat, 25 Mar 2023 01:04:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 11668 invoked by uid 109); 25 Mar 2023 08:04:54 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.2) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with ESMTP; Sat, 25 Mar 2023 08:04:54 +0000 Authentication-Results: cloud.peff.net; auth=none Received: (qmail 11451 invoked by uid 111); 25 Mar 2023 08:04:54 -0000 Received: from coredump.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.2) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with (TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Sat, 25 Mar 2023 04:04:54 -0400 Authentication-Results: peff.net; auth=none Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2023 04:04:53 -0400 From: Jeff King To: Eric Sunshine Cc: Michael J Gruber , git@vger.kernel.org, Phillip Wood , Derrick Stolee Subject: Re: [PATCH] t3070: make chain lint tester happy Message-ID: <20230325080453.GA852237@coredump.intra.peff.net> References: <13accf6f99d367d137eefd02e3f6bf05bf099e00.1679328580.git.phillip.wood@dunelm.org.uk> <3714ba2f6528c38eb9c438126316a08b0cefca7c.1679696180.git.git@grubix.eu> <20230325063731.GB562387@coredump.intra.peff.net> <20230325075832.GA579632@coredump.intra.peff.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20230325075832.GA579632@coredump.intra.peff.net> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Mar 25, 2023 at 03:58:32AM -0400, Jeff King wrote: > > > This looks like the right solution. I do wonder how Phillip managed to > > > miss it, though, since the test script complains loudly. > > > > I am unable to reproduce any linting errors when running this script > > through chainlint, which is why I was more than a little confused by > > this patch when I read it, and I was just about to ask for more > > information, such as the actual error message. > > It's not your chain-lint script, but rather the builtin one that sticks > "(exit 117) &&" in front of the snippet and evals it. So it creates the > exact "foo && bar &" situation by prepending a line to the snippet. And btw, I think that is the answer to "how did Phillip not notice it?". When running "make test" these days, we rely on chainlint.pl to detect any problems, and then set GIT_TEST_CHAIN_LINT=0 so that the scripts do not invoke it again. But that variable also suppresses the internal linter, and thus "make test" passes, but running the script individually does not. It does seem like a recipe for confusion if the two linters are not in agreement. I think we might want to either: 1. Say that the internal linter still has value, and tweak the suppression so it only turns off the extra per-script run of chainlint.pl, and not the internal one (which is cheap-ish to run). 2. Say that the internal linter does not have value, and we should rely on chainlint.pl. In which case we might as well ditch the internal one completely. I'm OK with this direction, if we're comfortable that there are no real problems that would be caught by the internal one but not the script. -Peff