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=-4.2 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 8CEFA20323 for ; Wed, 22 Mar 2017 22:04:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751309AbdCVWEi (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Mar 2017 18:04:38 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com ([64.147.108.71]:63046 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750867AbdCVWEg (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Mar 2017 18:04:36 -0400 Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CCB737CEB0; Wed, 22 Mar 2017 18:04:34 -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=hjLEDNOj/rkwCSl6jDXeId8prk8=; b=VxtkbK NqzeSrGR6+H5sWqfwsI9f4pyw5+g7Crwo9ZoR/je9XXYisE9+JMiNSZ2KpLKfYq5 Rd7/J9YE0dxB2BDvkanG8M9LK9xSaGllMlHQ9Y7YKpAMV5am3u2bGfYZ9HglsaIE OLTNtyRIDRKjdJOvXrvO8lha2qBYQuJKi8xt8= 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=c4We4fX7+uhBJkIdH4jsnXFGiIY0184k +Z4q9hZqtyyeoDo64nxb/Ks1l4BhcAWctlG1/Qz0F8bL9fzCX/7bnezgvx7wXiQ7 6L0sJ3F26M82m2wlyNF2XUWbJWsiNiv0TZUP9uTSY1Dnp+bLKl9tG8lYULaqTbkz PmBo9PbSRXA= Received: from pb-smtp2.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C52EA7CEAF; Wed, 22 Mar 2017 18:04:34 -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 1FF9A7CEAE; Wed, 22 Mar 2017 18:04:34 -0400 (EDT) From: Junio C Hamano To: Jeff King Cc: Santiago Torres , git@vger.kernel.org, Jan Palus Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] t7004, t7030: fix here-doc syntax errors References: <20170322173528.ho43ulndlozq35tu@kalarepa> <20170322200805.23837-1-gitster@pobox.com> <20170322200805.23837-4-gitster@pobox.com> <20170322211003.b52cql3iwig2xqcd@sigill.intra.peff.net> Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2017 15:04:32 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20170322211003.b52cql3iwig2xqcd@sigill.intra.peff.net> (Jeff King's message of "Wed, 22 Mar 2017 17:10:03 -0400") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.1.91 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 88478FA8-0F4B-11E7-AEE0-FC50AE2156B6-77302942!pb-smtp2.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Jeff King writes: > On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 01:08:05PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > >> From: Jan Palus >> >> These all came as part of an earlier st/verify-tag topic that was >> merged to 2.12. >> >> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano >> --- >> >> * This should be applied on top of 4fea72f4 ("t/t7004-tag: Add >> --format specifier tests", 2017-01-17) >> >> t/t7004-tag.sh | 8 ++++---- >> t/t7030-verify-tag.sh | 8 ++++---- >> 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) > > Like 2/3, this one also produces test failures for me. It looks like > "verify-tag" does not show a tag which has been forged. I'm not sure if > that's intentional (and the test is wrong) or a bug. +cc Santiago It appears that the test expected a broken one to be shown, and my reading of its log message is that the change expected --format= to be used with %G? so that scripts can tell between pass and fail? So if I have to judge, the code becoming silent for a tag that does not pass verification is not doing what the commit wanted it to do.