From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS3215 2.6.0.0/16 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.7 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE,URIBL_CSS,URIBL_CSS_A shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from out1.vger.email (out1.vger.email [IPv6:2620:137:e000::1:20]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id A7FDE1F54E for ; Thu, 1 Sep 2022 03:48:19 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: dcvr.yhbt.net; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="Ftgc14BH"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231308AbiIADsP (ORCPT ); Wed, 31 Aug 2022 23:48:15 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:45548 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229766AbiIADsL (ORCPT ); Wed, 31 Aug 2022 23:48:11 -0400 Received: from mail-qv1-xf30.google.com (mail-qv1-xf30.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::f30]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3B94915C796 for ; Wed, 31 Aug 2022 20:48:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qv1-xf30.google.com with SMTP id f9so8921183qvw.11 for ; Wed, 31 Aug 2022 20:48:10 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc; bh=/crcXGBCdU6+yL550XKEZ2KRjanFosVZgUCwErsFTPo=; b=Ftgc14BH28wxcZVylgLrRGn5WKxJfrH6cKHQv0UzmDsZy0/SCQIvOMngrlowcB7Mpd zshPIBwlf1GSLEJre73YlgcjSgOXgd3txLGaHz26s3hjkyhZv/noBBqh+fH3osvLI0J7 BmF/l+SGcxtzeq9eRTOZ7idkuQWDmEWJ2vnQaRasEOGYn+0wdzmAWYES9kltcMd79cba 8gCswOqHoAYvm7CAoioyQyDurmqmmTNS8aylPN1DK/+B5CxCpRnrSylhpXySPk21G/8G 8Ad66xLeV4IhKPCQq3teXkAyKPQBil5sMzNMMmboTVxGIScKpe2pjERVKMZLoyzfPoqo kuwQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc; bh=/crcXGBCdU6+yL550XKEZ2KRjanFosVZgUCwErsFTPo=; b=7msHUhtGLAm1bUM2NsYOxyi9YwSdWlkpHJlOysetQR90A7yuKibvADqwYo7IeMxoj0 KrdMX0ynlvUzX8nfFgViRj0QiZUAWqt5kgSI4Egyg5qPT4KcMjGaE31vIG2xO24YvSKQ 5UNOhrVFcuPIpLYmL3a3bP9+dmxHTyJMkhCcGg7NDZKz8mGzM9QH6wmZXENpqWVpDsxm 9YLES54Ljd0S3ckmyUkKmHBWgOu65Kd+eOOLeFm+KhAHeptYAfD8fwZpmNIxb+Nj+iMO vqYupI81KnHzo6XMo/LO128x6NcVXDXuqcaFsygzLe9F9kJNh3oakpBuWMrdyX+pYKIl ztEQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ACgBeo1Af7eFiuokb1yVd9QROPPAX4rAyrFMS8QSivmhrG4dBF814g0M 8h2CqpwCg1o/bgmZ7KPuHLXp342twZK9HsU+inuvvLOrZTs= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA6agR5jfItXNGT+PLi4ANBvGlT3h5YZUbQ3opkHMlT6XszA9xYf7V8z7ODmmxc7q25CVZD4K+1V+uigQ7s3zyH4xgE= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6214:d01:b0:497:fee:f359 with SMTP id 1-20020a0562140d0100b004970feef359mr22405058qvh.65.1662004089312; Wed, 31 Aug 2022 20:48:09 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Elijah Newren Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2022 20:47:58 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] Output fixes for --remerge-diff To: Junio C Hamano Cc: Elijah Newren via GitGitGadget , Git Mailing List , Philippe Blain Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Aug 31, 2022 at 6:13 PM Junio C Hamano wrote: > > "Elijah Newren via GitGitGadget" writes: > > > Philippe Blain found and reported a couple issues with the output of > > --remerge-diff[1]. After digging in, I think one of them actually counts as > > two separate issues, so here's a series with three patches to fix these > > issues. Each includes testcases to keep us from regressing. > > Including this to 'seen' seems to break the leaks-check CI job X-<. > > https://github.com/git/git/runs/8124648321?check_suite_focus=true That's...surprising. Any chance of a mis-merge? I ask for two reasons: * This series, built on main, passed the leaks-check job. * The link you provide points to t4069 as the test failing, but the second patch of this series removes the TEST_PASSES_SANITIZE_LEAK=true line from t4069, which should make that test a no-op for the leaks-check job.