Hi Gábor, On Fri, 14 Jun 2019, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > On Thu, 13 Jun 2019, SZEDER Gábor wrote: > > > On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 06:51:04PM +0200, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > > > > > On Thu, 13 Jun 2019, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > > > > > > SZEDER Gábor writes: > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 05:53:51AM -0700, Johannes Schindelin via > > > > > GitGitGadget wrote: > > > > >> From: Johannes Schindelin > > > > >> > > > > >> This job was abused to not only run the test suite in a regular > > > > >> way but also with all kinds of `GIT_TEST_*` options set to > > > > >> non-default values. > > > > >> > > > > >> Let's split this into two > > > > > > > > > > Why...? > > > > > > > > > >> with the `linux-gcc` job running the default test suite, and > > > > >> the newly-introduced `linux-gcc-extra` job running the test > > > > >> suite in the "special" ways. > > > > >> > > > > >> Technically, we would have to build Git only once, but it would > > > > >> not be obvious how to teach Travis to transport build > > > > >> artifacts, so we keep it simple and just build Git in both > > > > >> jobs. > > > > > > > > I had the same reaction. > > > > > > So basically you are saying that the cover letter was the wrong > > > location for this: > > > > > > For people like me, who often look at our CI builds, it is hard to > > > tell whether test suite failures in the linux-gcc job stem from > > > the first make test run, or from the second one, after setting all > > > kinds of GIT_TEST_* variables to non-default values. > > > > Is this really an issue in practice? > > I don't think that this is the right question. I still think that this is the wrong question. To put more water down the drain, I would like to challenge you to look at this build and tell me as fast as you can what half of the linux-gcc job fails, and whether the other half of the job fails, too, or whether the test cases succeed there, and if so, why: https://dev.azure.com/gitgitgadget/git/_build/results?buildId=11410&view=ms.vss-test-web.build-test-results-tab We really need to split linux-gcc. It's not right that it throws two completely separate concerns into the same bucket. Ciao, Dscho