Skip to content

Conversation

@ThomasWaldmann
Copy link
Member

No description provided.

@ThomasWaldmann ThomasWaldmann force-pushed the backport-haiku-bsd-ci-1.4-maint branch from 4a97c12 to a022d56 Compare November 21, 2025 20:55
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Nov 21, 2025

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 80.61%. Comparing base (ea6450b) to head (af707b8).
⚠️ Report is 1 commits behind head on 1.4-maint.

Additional details and impacted files
@@              Coverage Diff              @@
##           1.4-maint    #9192      +/-   ##
=============================================
+ Coverage      80.58%   80.61%   +0.03%     
=============================================
  Files             38       38              
  Lines          11251    11253       +2     
  Branches        1769     1769              
=============================================
+ Hits            9067     9072       +5     
+ Misses          1615     1613       -2     
+ Partials         569      568       -1     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

haiku does not have os.mknod.
and it looks like it does not have hardlinks either.
skip test_hard_link_deletion_and_replacement, borgbackup#9147, borgbackup#9153

The test fails on these platforms.

I could not find the root cause of this issue, but it is likely a minor
problem with ctime and doesn't affect borg usage much.

So I rather like to have CI on freebsd/netbsd not failing because of this.

tests(diff): on NetBSD only expect mtime for touched file in JSON diff
(treat like Windows); completes backport of borgbackup#9161 to 1.4-maint layout

tests(diff): also skip DiffArchiverTestCase.test_multiple_link_exclusion
when hardlinks unsupported (include are_hardlinks_supported in skip)
@ThomasWaldmann ThomasWaldmann force-pushed the backport-haiku-bsd-ci-1.4-maint branch from ceef955 to af707b8 Compare November 21, 2025 22:49
@ThomasWaldmann
Copy link
Member Author

netbsd/freebsd: hostname seems to be empty - why?

does master have other code or hostname or why does it not fail there?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant