[PATCH v3 2/6] t6030: explicitly test for bisection cleanup

This is not an improvement in the test coverage but it helps in making
it explicit as to what exactly would be the error as other tests are
focussed on testing other things.

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..a17f7a6 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_path_is_missing "$GIT_DIR/BISECT_EXPECTED_REV" &&
+	test_path_is_missing "$GIT_DIR/BISECT_ANCESTORS_OK" &&
+	test_path_is_missing "$GIT_DIR/BISECT_LOG" &&
+	test_path_is_missing "$GIT_DIR/BISECT_RUN" &&
+	test_path_is_missing "$GIT_DIR/BISECT_TERMS" &&
+	test_path_is_missing "$GIT_DIR/head-name" &&
+	test_path_is_missing "$GIT_DIR/BISECT_HEAD" &&
+	test_path_is_missing "$GIT_DIR/BISECT_START"
+'
+
 test_done

-- 
2.9.0