Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/11] p7519: use xargs -0 rather than -d in test

From: Junio C Hamano <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 02 Feb 2021 13:23:50 -0800

Jeff Hostetler <[email-masked]> writes:

> I'm not sure now that you mention it.  I suppose on modern filesystems
> that have mtimes with nanosecond fields we could (are) assuming that
> "touch" is actually doing something.  On older filesystems (such as
> FAT32), you're right it is probably not doing anything at the speed
> that the test runs.

That one is probably the most relevant nit among the ones I raised.
I do not actually mind if we used test-chmtime to force our own
timestamp (e.g. "5 seconds before the filesystem time"), and added
the helper the "--stdin" option to read paths to work around the
"xargs" issue.

> TBH I'm not sure that the test needs the "-h".  Symlinks are not that
> common and it shouldn't affect the timings that much if there are a few.

I agree.

> I'm not sure what to do about "-0".  Not even "--null" is portable.

Correct.  I do not think it is worth "digging", though.  I do not
mind "ls-files -z | test-tool chmtime -600 --stdin -z" to lose
xargs, but we already depend on GNU time to run t/perf, and it is
not too far a stretch to require GNU xargs that knows "-0" or "-d".

Thanks.