Drongo vs. 9.4 initdb TAP test
Buildfarm member drongo has been failing the initdb TAP test in the
9.4 branch for the last week or two:
# Running: rm -rf 'C:\prog\bf\root\REL9_4_STABLE\pgsql.build\src\bin\initdb\tmp_check\tmp_testAHN7'/*
'rm' is not recognized as an internal or external command,
operable program or batch file.
Bail out! system rm -rf 'C:\prog\bf\root\REL9_4_STABLE\pgsql.build\src\bin\initdb\tmp_check\tmp_testAHN7'/* failed: 256
The test has not changed; rather, it looks like drongo wasn't
trying to run it before.
This test is passing in the newer branches --- evidently due to
the 9.5-era commit 1a629c1b1, which removed this TAP script's
dependency on "rm -rf". So we should either back-patch that
commit into 9.4 or undo whatever configuration change caused
drongo to try to run more tests. I favor the former.
regards, tom lane
On Sun, Dec 22, 2019 at 07:24:09PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
This test is passing in the newer branches --- evidently due to
the 9.5-era commit 1a629c1b1, which removed this TAP script's
dependency on "rm -rf". So we should either back-patch that
commit into 9.4 or undo whatever configuration change caused
drongo to try to run more tests. I favor the former.
I would prefer simply removing the dependency of rm -rf in the tests,
even if that's for a short time as 9.4 is EOL in two months. A
back-patch applies without conflicts, and the tests are able to pass.
Would you prefer doing it yourself? I have not checked yet on
Windows, better to make sure that it does not fail.
--
Michael
Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> writes:
On Sun, Dec 22, 2019 at 07:24:09PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
This test is passing in the newer branches --- evidently due to
the 9.5-era commit 1a629c1b1, which removed this TAP script's
dependency on "rm -rf". So we should either back-patch that
commit into 9.4 or undo whatever configuration change caused
drongo to try to run more tests. I favor the former.
I would prefer simply removing the dependency of rm -rf in the tests,
even if that's for a short time as 9.4 is EOL in two months.
I'd vote for back-patching 1a629c1b1 as-is, or is that what you meant?
A back-patch applies without conflicts, and the tests are able to pass.
Would you prefer doing it yourself? I have not checked yet on
Windows, better to make sure that it does not fail.
I don't have the ability to test it on Windows --- if you want to do that,
feel free to do so and push.
regards, tom lane
On Sun, Dec 22, 2019 at 07:57:34PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> writes:
On Sun, Dec 22, 2019 at 07:24:09PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
This test is passing in the newer branches --- evidently due to
the 9.5-era commit 1a629c1b1, which removed this TAP script's
dependency on "rm -rf". So we should either back-patch that
commit into 9.4 or undo whatever configuration change caused
drongo to try to run more tests. I favor the former.I would prefer simply removing the dependency of rm -rf in the tests,
even if that's for a short time as 9.4 is EOL in two months.I'd vote for back-patching 1a629c1b1 as-is, or is that what you meant?
Yes, that's what I meant.
A back-patch applies without conflicts, and the tests are able to pass.
Would you prefer doing it yourself? I have not checked yet on
Windows, better to make sure that it does not fail.I don't have the ability to test it on Windows --- if you want to do that,
feel free to do so and push.
Thanks, done. The original commit had a typo in one comment, fixed by
a9793e07 later on so I have included this fix as well here.
--
Michael