Re: [PATCH] t9824: fix wrong reference value

3 messages, 3 authors, 2016-06-16 · open the first message on its own page

Re: [PATCH] t9824: fix wrong reference value

From: Junio C Hamano <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-16 02:19:05

Lars Schneider [off-list ref] writes:
0492eb4 fixed a broken &&-chain in this test which broke the test as it
checked for a wrong size. The expected size of the file under test is
39 bytes. The test checked that the size is 13 bytes. Fix the reference
value to make the test pass, again.

Signed-off-by: Lars Schneider <redacted>
---
That breaking "fix" seems to have been acked by you.

It was sort of clear that SZEDER didn't actually ran the test from
the patch, saying "As far as I can tell after eyeballing the test
script,", but you obviously didn't actually have a chance to test it
until now.

Thanks for fixing it before it hits 'master'; this time I think it
is safe to assume that this was actually tested ;-)

quoted hunk
 t/t9824-git-p4-git-lfs.sh | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/t/t9824-git-p4-git-lfs.sh b/t/t9824-git-p4-git-lfs.sh
index 64f8d18..3fc6790 100755
--- a/t/t9824-git-p4-git-lfs.sh
+++ b/t/t9824-git-p4-git-lfs.sh
@@ -265,7 +265,7 @@ test_expect_success 'Add big files to repo and store files in LFS based on compr
 		# We only import HEAD here ("@all" is missing!)
 		git p4 clone --destination="$git" //depot &&
 
-		test_file_in_lfs file6.bin 13 "content 6 bin 39 bytes XXXXXYYYYYZZZZZ" &&
+		test_file_in_lfs file6.bin 39 "content 6 bin 39 bytes XXXXXYYYYYZZZZZ" &&
 		test_file_count_in_dir ".git/lfs/objects" 1 &&
 
 		cat >expect <<-\EOF &&

--
https://github.com/git/git/pull/235

Re: [PATCH] t9824: fix wrong reference value

From: Lars Schneider <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-16 02:19:05

On 29 Apr 2016, at 19:34, Junio C Hamano [off-list ref] wrote:
Lars Schneider [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
0492eb4 fixed a broken &&-chain in this test which broke the test as it
checked for a wrong size. The expected size of the file under test is
39 bytes. The test checked that the size is 13 bytes. Fix the reference
value to make the test pass, again.

Signed-off-by: Lars Schneider <redacted>
---
That breaking "fix" seems to have been acked by you.

It was sort of clear that SZEDER didn't actually ran the test from
the patch, saying "As far as I can tell after eyeballing the test
script,", but you obviously didn't actually have a chance to test it
until now.

Thanks for fixing it before it hits 'master'; this time I think it
is safe to assume that this was actually tested ;-)
Yes! Lesson learned! Sorry Szeder!

- Lars

quoted
t/t9824-git-p4-git-lfs.sh | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/t/t9824-git-p4-git-lfs.sh b/t/t9824-git-p4-git-lfs.sh
index 64f8d18..3fc6790 100755
--- a/t/t9824-git-p4-git-lfs.sh
+++ b/t/t9824-git-p4-git-lfs.sh
@@ -265,7 +265,7 @@ test_expect_success 'Add big files to repo and store files in LFS based on compr
		# We only import HEAD here ("@all" is missing!)
		git p4 clone --destination="$git" //depot &&

-		test_file_in_lfs file6.bin 13 "content 6 bin 39 bytes XXXXXYYYYYZZZZZ" &&
+		test_file_in_lfs file6.bin 39 "content 6 bin 39 bytes XXXXXYYYYYZZZZZ" &&
		test_file_count_in_dir ".git/lfs/objects" 1 &&

		cat >expect <<-\EOF &&

--
https://github.com/git/git/pull/235

Re: [PATCH] t9824: fix wrong reference value

From: Luke Diamand <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-16 02:19:05

On 29 April 2016 at 21:29, Lars Schneider [off-list ref] wrote:
On 29 Apr 2016, at 19:34, Junio C Hamano [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
Lars Schneider [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
0492eb4 fixed a broken &&-chain in this test which broke the test as it
checked for a wrong size. The expected size of the file under test is
39 bytes. The test checked that the size is 13 bytes. Fix the reference
value to make the test pass, again.

Signed-off-by: Lars Schneider <redacted>
---
That breaking "fix" seems to have been acked by you.

It was sort of clear that SZEDER didn't actually ran the test from
the patch, saying "As far as I can tell after eyeballing the test
script,", but you obviously didn't actually have a chance to test it
until now.

Thanks for fixing it before it hits 'master'; this time I think it
is safe to assume that this was actually tested ;-)
Yes! Lesson learned! Sorry Szeder!
How does the old saying go? If it hasn't been tested, it doesn't work!

Luke
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help