Re: [PATCH v5 0/2] hook API: connect hooks to the TTY again, fixes a v2.36.0 regression

["Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason" <avarab@gmail.com>]

On Fri, Jun 03 2022, Phillip Wood wrote:

> Hi Ævar
>
> On 03/06/2022 10:20, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
>> On Fri, Jun 03 2022, Phillip Wood wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi Ævar
>>>
>>> On 02/06/2022 15:07, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
>>>> This series fixes a v2.36.0 regression[1]. See [2] for the v4. The
>>>> reasons for why a regression needs this relatively large change to
>>>> move forward is discussed in past rounds, e.g. around [3]. CI at
>>>> https://github.com/avar/git/actions/runs/2428475773
>>>> Changes since v4, mainly to address comments by Johannes (thanks for
>>>> the review!):
>>>>    * First, some things like renaming "ungroup" to something else &
>>>>      rewriting the tests I didn't do because I thought keeping the
>>>>      inter/range-diff down in size outweighed re-arranging or changing
>>>>      the code at this late stage.
>>>>      In the case of the suggested shorter test in
>>>>      https://lore.kernel.org/git/nycvar.QRO.7.76.6.2206011827300.349@tvgsbejvaqbjf.bet/
>>>>      the replacement wasn't testing the same thing. I.e. we don't see
>>>>      what's connected to a TTY if we redirect one of stdout or stderr
>>>>      anymore, which is important to get right.
>>>
>>> I'm a bit confused by this, the proposed test uses this hook script
>>>
>>> 	write_script .git/hooks/pre-commit <<-EOF
>>> 	test -t 1 && echo "stdout is a TTY" >out
>>> 	test -t 2 && echo "stderr is a TTY" >>out
>>> 	EOF
>>>
>>> if either of stderr or stdout is redirected then the corresponding
>>> "test -t" should fail and so we will detect that it is not a tty.
>> Yes, exactly, but the proposed test doesn't test that, in that case
>> both
>> of them are connected, the test in 2/2 does test that case.
>
> I think I must be missing something. As I understand it we want to
> check that the hook can see a tty on stdout and stderr. In the test
> above we'll get a line printed for each fd that is a tty. Your test
> always redirects one of stdout and stderr - why is it important to
> test that? - it feels like it is testing the shell's redirection code
> rather than git.

Yes, I think I'm the one who was missing something.

I looked at this again and I thought I'd been testing that e.g. one of
the two not returning true from isatty() wasn't making both "not TTY",
i.e. that run-command.c wasn't performing some shenanigans.

But that was probably too paranoid, and in any case I couldn't find a
good way to test it.

> I was concerned that we had also regressed the handling of stdin but
> looking at (the now deleted) run_hook_ve() it used to set .no_stdin =
> 1 so that is unchanged in the new code.

*nod*

I re-rolled a v6 just now which I think should address your comments
here:
https://lore.kernel.org/git/cover-v6-0.2-00000000000-20220606T170356Z-avarab@gmail.com/

I've still kept the "clean up after yourself" etc. behavior in the test,
and since it was easy we now test both "git hook run" and "git commit".

Thanks a lot for the careful review.