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-Status: No, score=-3.9 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0BA51F66F for ; Fri, 20 Nov 2020 00:10:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726412AbgKTAHV (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Nov 2020 19:07:21 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com ([64.147.108.70]:54348 "EHLO pb-smtp1.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726117AbgKTAHU (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Nov 2020 19:07:20 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6CB178339F; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 19:07:18 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) 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:content-transfer-encoding; s=sasl; bh=iB8biz4PehG4 PFqMUaxYH2Ze2H4=; b=ExPatCQYLMfcLFEUewv1+++p8xts54kVDY/1rlJKnf/c 5m1kmB3I4rrf1RLiftktPjmRg8j2kSLT2WF/eeMH2MSdTDhUc3qSWglUMzDoiRck sRGT16NN6zD1ETjjbrYn3RsR40OqTleN5M9kvnXZ2UgYMmiRfEb1TSpTszMkxdI= 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:content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=sasl; b=JltWVs y8PDs7Ief+CMYHGQTR81MTZyxiTUZMRkmYFMtKG00KStwI6I5zptgS0HhX7eCgkw NSJgoQV9H2Z2yWd/Yhw+ggdM1bYzFeWnvW7IPP6kX2gSm/3wwplt3nuxsdpopf6S a2xRckD/MkzLsBeBoasT9Ut1ESqv25SVR+niQ= Received: from pb-smtp1.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 648B18339E; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 19:07:18 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.74.119.39]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id CF48C8339D; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 19:07:17 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Jeff King Cc: SZEDER =?utf-8?Q?G=C3=A1bor?= , git@vger.kernel.org, Johannes Schindelin Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] tests: make sure nested lazy prereqs work reliably References: <20201118190414.32616-1-szeder.dev@gmail.com> <20201119155824.GB25426@coredump.intra.peff.net> Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 16:07:17 -0800 In-Reply-To: <20201119155824.GB25426@coredump.intra.peff.net> (Jeff King's message of "Thu, 19 Nov 2020 10:58:24 -0500") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 5A1B912C-2AC4-11EB-A133-D152C8D8090B-77302942!pb-smtp1.pobox.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Jeff King writes: > On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 08:04:13PM +0100, SZEDER G=C3=A1bor wrote: > >> So to prevent nested prereqs from interfering with each other let's >> evaluate each prereq in its own dedicated directory by appending the >> prereq's name to the directory name, e.g. 'prereq-test-dir-SYMLINKS'. >> In the test we check not only that the prereq test dir is still there, >> but also that the inner prereq can't mess with the outer prereq's >> files. > > That sounds reasonable. I do wonder, though, whether simply creating th= e > prereq directory in the _current_ directory would be sufficient. Then > you'd get prereq-test-dir/prereq-test-dir for a nested invocation. But > the prereqs aren't supposed to care about which specific directory > they're in. True. That does sound conceptually simpler. As we've already seen the patch, I do not mind too deeply either way, though. Thanks.