From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.7 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68ADD1F6C1 for ; Tue, 30 Aug 2016 19:15:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751297AbcH3TP0 (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Aug 2016 15:15:26 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com ([64.147.108.71]:59697 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750846AbcH3TPZ (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Aug 2016 15:15:25 -0400 Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E8E73A2BB; Tue, 30 Aug 2016 15:15:24 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=C2SVE3klc94Ep6x7myK9qBARyQw=; b=rAsvkI H5fL2xg9gUb8cwRMHhsYl4MdXhgJYtpbRAV3m/wnm2wdU484/2hmf26fADX6DgPi y6l9ulsqgDMJD1Q5AHTKMCBP3INd6lvUooXYPRC3Tt8a/QKcY6wJIt5E9xO5x+8E j6Lzw3MhN230uTTAQGUQc3oRihbefXDnUt4Ts= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=DqgANpXmSfULYheLiyab+0m/4z8QqGe4 s0QjO/Xuump1KMY3wWq29E3Sz8/Uv7cwXllQ4DGyZYmqSnOTaXc2i2h/yTMQendL JhmDIKMcdfpf/9Al0TsrKMkPBwN4HVUfaoq7oN5iaenDvNNsnLNNm8qEahlLWgl7 rBAvClo+qtI= Received: from pb-smtp2.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3592C3A2BA; Tue, 30 Aug 2016 15:15:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [104.132.0.95]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A3BDC3A2B9; Tue, 30 Aug 2016 15:15:23 -0400 (EDT) From: Junio C Hamano To: Jeff King Cc: Johannes Schindelin , git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] t/Makefile: add a rule to re-run previously-failed tests References: <0dfa96b17edfe84ba19c7e57fe0b017c77943e0c.1472478285.git.johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> <20160830084357.rdmt2ehngrz6rqaq@sigill.intra.peff.net> Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2016 12:15:21 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20160830084357.rdmt2ehngrz6rqaq@sigill.intra.peff.net> (Jeff King's message of "Tue, 30 Aug 2016 04:43:57 -0400") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 19DD2EF2-6EE6-11E6-9B77-51057B1B28F4-77302942!pb-smtp2.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Jeff King writes: > Hmm, interesting. Your approach seems reasonable, but I have to wonder > if writing the pid in the first place is sane. > > I started to write up my reasoning in this email, but realized it was > rapidly becoming the content of a commit message. So here is that > commit. Sounds sensible; if this makes Dscho's "which ones failed in the previous run" simpler, that is even better ;-)