On Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at 10:35 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Dan McGee writes:
>
>> This works great now, thanks! I ran it through our package build
>> scripts and all tests now pass as expected.
>
> If you have a chance, could you try tip of the 'next' branch without
> this patch applied? We had an
On Wed, Jan 02, 2013 at 08:34:42AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Jeff King writes:
>
> > Whether we end up doing something with contrib and tests or not, the
> > patch below gives a minimal fix in the meantime.
>
> Replacing the symbolic link with write_script that uses exported
> variables lo
Dan McGee writes:
> This works great now, thanks! I ran it through our package build
> scripts and all tests now pass as expected.
If you have a chance, could you try tip of the 'next' branch without
this patch applied? We had an equivalent patch cooking there for
some time by now.
Thanks.
--
Jeff King writes:
> Whether we end up doing something with contrib and tests or not, the
> patch below gives a minimal fix in the meantime.
Replacing the symbolic link with write_script that uses exported
variables looks like a familiar pattern. I like it.
Oh, wait. That pattern is of course
On Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at 2:59 AM, Jeff King wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 01, 2013 at 11:18:46PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
>> Jeff King writes:
>>
>> > [1] This symlink is doubly wrong, because any use of symbolic links
>> > in the test scripts needs to depend on the SYMLINKS prereq, and this
>> >
Jeff King wrote:
On Tue, Jan 01, 2013 at 11:18:46PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Jeff King writes:
[1] This symlink is doubly wrong, because any use of symbolic links
in the test scripts needs to depend on the SYMLINKS prereq, and
this does not.
Yeah, I think we have discussed this
On Tue, Jan 01, 2013 at 11:18:46PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Jeff King writes:
>
> > [1] This symlink is doubly wrong, because any use of symbolic links
> > in the test scripts needs to depend on the SYMLINKS prereq, and this
> > does not.
>
> Yeah, I think we have discussed this o
Jeff King writes:
> [1] This symlink is doubly wrong, because any use of symbolic links
> in the test scripts needs to depend on the SYMLINKS prereq, and this
> does not.
Yeah, I think we have discussed this once already in
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/210688/f
On Tue, Jan 01, 2013 at 09:19:13PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Dan McGee writes:
>
> > A test case snuck in this release that assumes /usr/bin/python is
> > python2 and causes test failures. Unlike all other tests and code
> > depending on python, this one does not respect PYTHON_PATH, which
Junio C Hamano :
> Dan McGee writes:
>
> > A test case snuck in this release that assumes /usr/bin/python is
> > python2 and causes test failures. Unlike all other tests and code
> > depending on python, this one does not respect PYTHON_PATH, which we
> > explicitly set when building git on Arch
Dan McGee writes:
> A test case snuck in this release that assumes /usr/bin/python is
> python2 and causes test failures. Unlike all other tests and code
> depending on python, this one does not respect PYTHON_PATH, which we
> explicitly set when building git on Arch Linux due to python2 vs
> pyt
A test case snuck in this release that assumes /usr/bin/python is
python2 and causes test failures. Unlike all other tests and code
depending on python, this one does not respect PYTHON_PATH, which we
explicitly set when building git on Arch Linux due to python2 vs
python3 differences.
-Dan
make[
12 matches
Mail list logo
