Re: [PATCH 3/4] Clean: Remove unnecessary `\' (line continuation)
From: Junio C Hamano <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 22:50:56
Michael Witten [off-list ref] writes:
quoted hunk
Signed-off-by: Michael Witten <redacted> --- t/t8001-annotate.sh | 2 +- 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)diff --git a/t/t8001-annotate.sh b/t/t8001-annotate.sh index 45cb60e..68ac828 100755 --- a/t/t8001-annotate.sh +++ b/t/t8001-annotate.sh@@ -8,7 +8,7 @@ PROG='git annotate' test_expect_success \ 'Annotating an old revision works' \ - '[ $(git annotate file master | awk "{print \$3}" | grep -c "^A$") -eq 2 ] && \ + '[ $(git annotate file master | awk "{print \$3}" | grep -c "^A$") -eq 2 ] && [ $(git annotate file master | awk "{print \$3}" | grep -c "^B$") -eq 2 ]'
While this is not wrong per-se, I don't want to take too much half-way
churning.
If we were to properly do this, we should first rewrite it to use the more
modern style:
test_expect_success 'Annotating an old revision works' '
... test script comes here ...
'
and just run annotate once without having any downstream pipe, i.e.
git annotate file master >result &&
awk "{ print \$3; }" <result >authors &&
test 2 = $(grep A <authors | wc -l) &&
test 2 = $(grep B <authors | wc -l)
so that we can catch breakage in "git annotate" itself more reliably
(e.g. even if the command showed two lines for each author, it is a
failure if the command itself did not exit with status 0).