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=-2.7 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM, RP_MATCHES_RCVD,T_DKIM_INVALID shortcircuit=no autolearn=no 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 EDBA620357 for ; Mon, 17 Jul 2017 22:09:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751511AbdGQWJr (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Jul 2017 18:09:47 -0400 Received: from mail-pg0-f52.google.com ([74.125.83.52]:35116 "EHLO mail-pg0-f52.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751414AbdGQWJq (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Jul 2017 18:09:46 -0400 Received: by mail-pg0-f52.google.com with SMTP id v190so1484400pgv.2 for ; Mon, 17 Jul 2017 15:09:46 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id :user-agent:mime-version; bh=SWDoMaQIhZdth1fEjb1oN3fidOO3qTjR90549XNYP8w=; b=rmrIJATeIV6jOX3ctHDHg8UnnYYZQhmZmIs0+YIGSBzCduQVyQPGT/+yrA6E3Frne3 DysBeQsTOiocJp3cxV/i5PSNqe3H0UENHipZcusS+Whb7ICj+tK0ijZ2VFk5q061Ljxq 4W7diStnZ2lPaGOf29K3S4YSf4CzR698/p/c7JEmlCtOsXMABYIgZJWs3UoEbVx1NUpd F8ghh67vWopk+Vdod1HtsrecOQW+McDj+hojjgde4Bfc6ZI7BYVwcmAq6QOfm5zxZ4LG xkZhzYNJ7PfvqALwsFdHqUS4TANoIimwUu7dFPGDm7S6mac1dgIVpxRD5vXpiIDY2+DV V6qw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date :in-reply-to:message-id:user-agent:mime-version; bh=SWDoMaQIhZdth1fEjb1oN3fidOO3qTjR90549XNYP8w=; b=PV3VvRWWArNuTjO8zigpqQPy5tfpQw56yRLfEbi4o8v+5nxHRevFfGhU/w6JvNHN/Z hl501rI/wTLiPN9odVNd8gBHLDYg8thGZ2h2dhb1Mc8GtYjEVtUxq9WRQTJqklwWN3Xc KJ2DHRoCLJFTXOBAUYBq4s0jNHACr8VlX5OYK8h49mFdTSMkJCwcvGMa32JKWcdFdKSN gGZoGFYM+k/+tSLHUaafBOj2+eh6DHGfaKUTwbHWWPHt5Id/Vo4mEI7KzGbRkGLD623T 9Ev3GuTA6jIUVvZ/n8vQb189fCHbxW5qRterTgU2CJ6i5YSQUGVm5iPAF4boptEuoNPR VGBg== X-Gm-Message-State: AIVw111AvPFrTiY8RZklgD8SWdwvx1hKhixR2mv70yiFXpQD6GSqcXea 4uiUoZGkfF2emw== X-Received: by 10.98.35.214 with SMTP id q83mr21690132pfj.101.1500329386214; Mon, 17 Jul 2017 15:09:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([2620:0:1000:8622:480d:579b:4a3b:27f3]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id a29sm450042pfg.30.2017.07.17.15.09.45 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 17 Jul 2017 15:09:45 -0700 (PDT) From: Junio C Hamano To: Santiago Torres Cc: git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: What's cooking in git.git (Jul 2017, #04; Thu, 13) References: <20170714002754.jyck5qmykbmuado7@LykOS.localdomain> <20170714140241.mqg5256ml3grmrn6@LykOS.localdomain> <20170717214241.yui75hywg2ddkfsb@LykOS.localdomain> Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2017 15:09:44 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20170717214241.yui75hywg2ddkfsb@LykOS.localdomain> (Santiago Torres's message of "Mon, 17 Jul 2017 17:42:41 -0400") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Santiago Torres writes: > Other projects such as notmuch opted for a solution that's simlar to > what I had suggested[1], but I wonder if it's even necessary to do. > There is already a fix on the master branch of gnupg[2], which I imagine > will show up to the next version of gpg2. > > I don't think it would make sense to fix anything on our side, unless we > want to be extra sure the test suite is not leaking agents for all gpg > versions (including these minor versions). I am not sure if it is merely "if it's even necessary"; if there are two tests running in parallel, with their own separate $TRASH_DIRECTORY, and one of them say "kill the agent" at the beginning, would it affect the other test, depending on the timing? I would imagine that the sockets are kept per GNUPGHOME and they are not going to interfere, so if that is the case, I do not think we mind helping folks with a buggy versions of GnuPG by having a "let's be cautious and kill a leftover agent before starting to test" patch, as long as the reason why we do so is clearly understood and documented. Thanks for digging it to the root cause.