Re: conflicts-130 fails - more info

[Larry Jones]

Derek R. Price writes:
> 
> Well, I checked in a patch for somebody recently which makes the VMS port
> sort files since I was reluctant to change that many sanity.sh tests to use
> dotest_sort, but I'm starting to believe that file order is none of CVS's
> business (other than to maintain whatever order the file system returned),
> with the possible exception of user specified file order and I'm not even
> sure I want to go there.

Wasn't that the MVS port?  I seem to recall problems due to EBCDIC vs
ASCII collating sequences.

> Anyone think the answer isn't to sort the tests?  We lose quite a bit of
> information that way, but I think this may be the lesser of two evils.

I think we need to look at it on a case-by-case basis.  We've already
dealt with this problem at least once (for IRIX's xfs filesystem), which
is where dotest_sort came from.  As long as the order of the output
isn't significant, I don't have any problem with using dotest_sort, but
I hate to lose important ordering information in the general case in
order to address a very rare problem.  After all, one just needs *some*
filesystem with reasonably traditional sematics to run the sanity tests
on once, you don't have to use it all the time.

-Larry Jones

My dreams are getting way too literal. -- Calvin