ci: improve reftable test coverage
The "linux-reftable" job exercises Git with reftables as its default backend. But this job is arguably redundant because we already have the "linux-reftable-leaks" job that exercises reftables with the leak sanitizer enabled, and it is unlikely that we will catch any extra bugs with the leak sanitizer disabled. One may thus be triggered to just drop the "linux-reftable" job in favor of the leak-checking variant. But the latter disables a couple of other tests that exercise git-p4, git-svn and other tools. Those tools may not be an essential part of Git nowadays, but I don't quite feel comfortable with reducing test coverage. Instead, adapt the job to run reftables together with SHA256. which is an area that we don't have test coverage for. Signed-off-by: Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
This commit is contained in:
1 parent
1476be81b7
commit
3fff230cf5
3 files changed
+7
-4
No files matched your search
@@ -405,7 +405,7 @@ jobs:
|
||||
- jobname: linux-sha256
|
||||
image: ubuntu:rolling
|
||||
cc: clang
|
||||
- jobname: linux-reftable
|
||||
- jobname: linux-reftable-sha256
|
||||
image: ubuntu:rolling
|
||||
cc: clang
|
||||
- jobname: linux-feature-testbed
|
||||
|
||||
+1
-1
@@ -39,7 +39,7 @@ test:linux:
|
||||
- jobname: linux-sha256
|
||||
image: ubuntu:rolling
|
||||
CC: clang
|
||||
- jobname: linux-reftable
|
||||
- jobname: linux-reftable-sha256
|
||||
image: ubuntu:rolling
|
||||
CC: clang
|
||||
- jobname: linux-feature-testbed
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -40,10 +40,13 @@ linux-feature-testbed)
|
||||
linux-sha256)
|
||||
export GIT_TEST_DEFAULT_HASH=sha256
|
||||
;;
|
||||
linux-reftable|linux-reftable-leaks|osx-reftable)
|
||||
linux-reftable-sha256)
|
||||
export GIT_TEST_DEFAULT_REF_FORMAT=reftable
|
||||
export GIT_TEST_DEFAULT_HASH=sha256
|
||||
;;
|
||||
linux-reftable-leaks|osx-reftable)
|
||||
export GIT_TEST_DEFAULT_REF_FORMAT=reftable
|
||||
;;
|
||||
|
||||
esac
|
||||
|
||||
case "$jobname" in
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in new issue
Block a user