Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 00/17] propose config-based hooks (part I)

From: Emily Shaffer <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2020 18:07:48 -0800

On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 03:32:46PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> 
> Emily Shaffer <[email-masked]> writes:
> 
> >> By the way, es/config-hooks does not seem to pass 5411 (at least)
> >> even as a standalone topic, and has been kicked out of 'seen' for
> >> some time.  Has anybody took a look into the issue?
> >
> > Yeah, I looked at it today. Looks like an issue with not paying
> > attention to master->main default config, since I added a new test to
> > the 5411 suite (which means it wouldn't have made a conflict for someone
> > to say "ah yes, s/master/main/g"). I am tracking down couple of other CI
> > errors today and will send a reroll today or tomorrow.
> 
> Thanks.

I don't have a reroll today. I have been trying to get to the bottom of
a test which fails when built with clang but passes when built with gcc
(t6030-bisect-porcelain.sh after patch 12 of the part II series) and
have not made progress on that, let alone on the other tasks I wanted to
do before sending the next version.

Next week I will only work one day, so I'd anticipate a reroll sometime
the week following. Sorry for the wait - but I think even if I sent it
with the fix for this t5411 failure, it would still break 'seen' because
of whatever this clang vs. gcc problem is.

Hope you enjoy your holidays.

 - Emily