If we're building against a version of Xapian that doesn't offer retrying the lock, we should be honest and describe the tests as broken, rather than marking them as missing a test prerequisite.
missing test prerequisites should be for specific components of the test harness that are missing, not for the backend library notmuch uses. --- test/T620-lock.sh | 10 ++++++---- 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/test/T620-lock.sh b/test/T620-lock.sh index 085ffe43..7aaaff2a 100755 --- a/test/T620-lock.sh +++ b/test/T620-lock.sh @@ -2,13 +2,12 @@ test_description="locking" . $(dirname "$0")/test-lib.sh || exit 1 -if [ "${NOTMUCH_HAVE_XAPIAN_DB_RETRY_LOCK}" = "0" ]; then - test_subtest_missing_external_prereq_["lock retry support"]=t -fi - add_email_corpus test_begin_subtest "blocking open" +if [ $NOTMUCH_HAVE_XAPIAN_DB_RETRY_LOCK -ne 1 ]; then + test_subtest_known_broken +fi test_C ${MAIL_DIR} <<'EOF' #include <unistd.h> #include <stdlib.h> @@ -70,6 +69,9 @@ inbox parent unread EOF +if [ $NOTMUCH_HAVE_XAPIAN_DB_RETRY_LOCK -ne 1 ]; then + test_subtest_known_broken +fi test_expect_equal_file EXPECTED OUTPUT test_done -- 2.15.0 _______________________________________________ notmuch mailing list notmuch@notmuchmail.org https://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch