[PATCH] t6030: explicitly test for bisection cleanup

Subsystems: the rest

STALE3735d

4 messages, 2 authors, 2016-06-16 · open the first message on its own page

[PATCH] t6030: explicitly test for bisection cleanup

From: Pranit Bauva <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-16 02:19:22

This is not an improvement in the test coverage but it helps in making
it explicit as to know what exactly is the error as other tests are
focussed on testing other things but they do indirectly test for this.

Mentored-by: Lars Schneider [off-list ref]
Mentored-by: Christian Couder [off-list ref]
Signed-off-by: Pranit Bauva <redacted>

---
I faced this problem while converting `bisect_clean_state` and the tests
where showing breakages but it wasn't clear as to where exactly are they
breaking. This will patch  will help in that. Also I tested the test
coverage of the test suite before this patch and it covers this (I did
this by purposely changing names of files in git-bisect.sh and running
the test suite).

Signed-off-by: Pranit Bauva <redacted>
---
 t/t6030-bisect-porcelain.sh | 17 +++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+)
diff --git a/t/t6030-bisect-porcelain.sh b/t/t6030-bisect-porcelain.sh
index e74662b..1fb5ad9 100755
--- a/t/t6030-bisect-porcelain.sh
+++ b/t/t6030-bisect-porcelain.sh
@@ -894,4 +894,21 @@ test_expect_success 'bisect start takes options and revs in any order' '
 	test_cmp expected actual
 '
 
+test_expect_success 'git bisect reset cleans bisection state properly' '
+	git bisect reset &&
+	git bisect start &&
+	git bisect good $HASH1 &&
+	git bisect bad $HASH4 &&
+	git bisect reset &&
+	test -z "$(git for-each-ref "refs/bisect/*")" &&
+	! test -s "$GIT_DIR/BISECT_EXPECTED_REV" &&
+	! test -s "$GIT_DIR/BISECT_ANCESTORS_OK" &&
+	! test -s "$GIT_DIR/BISECT_LOG" &&
+	! test -s "$GIT_DIR/BISECT_RUN" &&
+	! test -s "$GIT_DIR/BISECT_TERMS" &&
+	! test -s "$GIT_DIR/head-name" &&
+	! test -s "$GIT_DIR/BISECT_HEAD" &&
+	! test -s "$GIT_DIR/BISECT_START"
+'
+
 test_done
-- 
2.8.2

Re: [PATCH] t6030: explicitly test for bisection cleanup

From: Pranit Bauva <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-16 02:19:38

On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 3:44 PM, Pranit Bauva [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted hunk
This is not an improvement in the test coverage but it helps in making
it explicit as to know what exactly is the error as other tests are
focussed on testing other things but they do indirectly test for this.

Mentored-by: Lars Schneider [off-list ref]
Mentored-by: Christian Couder [off-list ref]
Signed-off-by: Pranit Bauva <redacted>

---
I faced this problem while converting `bisect_clean_state` and the tests
where showing breakages but it wasn't clear as to where exactly are they
breaking. This will patch  will help in that. Also I tested the test
coverage of the test suite before this patch and it covers this (I did
this by purposely changing names of files in git-bisect.sh and running
the test suite).

Signed-off-by: Pranit Bauva <redacted>
---
 t/t6030-bisect-porcelain.sh | 17 +++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+)
diff --git a/t/t6030-bisect-porcelain.sh b/t/t6030-bisect-porcelain.sh
index e74662b..1fb5ad9 100755
--- a/t/t6030-bisect-porcelain.sh
+++ b/t/t6030-bisect-porcelain.sh
@@ -894,4 +894,21 @@ test_expect_success 'bisect start takes options and revs in any order' '
        test_cmp expected actual
 '

+test_expect_success 'git bisect reset cleans bisection state properly' '
+       git bisect reset &&
+       git bisect start &&
+       git bisect good $HASH1 &&
+       git bisect bad $HASH4 &&
+       git bisect reset &&
+       test -z "$(git for-each-ref "refs/bisect/*")" &&
+       ! test -s "$GIT_DIR/BISECT_EXPECTED_REV" &&
+       ! test -s "$GIT_DIR/BISECT_ANCESTORS_OK" &&
+       ! test -s "$GIT_DIR/BISECT_LOG" &&
+       ! test -s "$GIT_DIR/BISECT_RUN" &&
+       ! test -s "$GIT_DIR/BISECT_TERMS" &&
+       ! test -s "$GIT_DIR/head-name" &&
+       ! test -s "$GIT_DIR/BISECT_HEAD" &&
+       ! test -s "$GIT_DIR/BISECT_START"
+'
+
 test_done
--
2.8.2
Anyone any comments?

Regards,
Pranit Bauva

Re: [PATCH] t6030: explicitly test for bisection cleanup

From: Christian Couder <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-16 02:19:38

On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 7:57 PM, Pranit Bauva [off-list ref] wrote:
Anyone any comments?
Maybe you could add this patch to, or squash it into, the patch that
convert bisect_clean_state to C.

Thanks,
Christian.

Re: [PATCH] t6030: explicitly test for bisection cleanup

From: Pranit Bauva <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-16 02:19:38

Hey Christian,

On Sat, May 28, 2016 at 12:30 AM, Christian Couder
[off-list ref] wrote:
On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 7:57 PM, Pranit Bauva [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
Anyone any comments?
Maybe you could add this patch to, or squash it into, the patch that
convert bisect_clean_state to C.
Sure!

Regards,
Pranit Bauva
Thanks,
Christian.
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help