Re: [PATCH v3 4/9] t3701: don't hard code sha1 hash values

On 28/02/18 11:03, Phillip Wood wrote:

On 27/02/18 22:42, Junio C Hamano wrote:

quoted

Phillip Wood [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

 t/t3701-add-interactive.sh | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++----------
 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)

diff --git a/t/t3701-add-interactive.sh b/t/t3701-add-interactive.sh
index bdd1f292a9..46d655038f 100755
--- a/t/t3701-add-interactive.sh
+++ b/t/t3701-add-interactive.sh

@@ -10,6 +10,16 @@ then
 	test_done
 fi
 
+diff_cmp () {
+	for x
+	do
+		sed  -e '/^index/s/[0-9a-f]*[1-9a-f][0-9a-f]*\.\./1234567../' \
+		     -e '/^index/s/\.\.[0-9a-f]*[1-9a-f][0-9a-f]*/..9abcdef/' \
+		     "$x" >"$x.filtered"

Interesting ;-)  You require .. and on the left hand side you want
to see a run of hexdec with at least one non-zero hexdigit, which is
filtered to fixed-length 1234567; right hand side is the same deal.

Which sounds like a reasonable way to future-proof the comparison.

If 7 zeros are expected in the result, and the actual output had 8
zeros, the filter does not touch either so they compare differently,
which is somewhat unfortunate.  Perhaps something like

Ah, good point

quoted

	/^index/s/^00*\.\./0000000../
	/^index/s/\([^0-9a-f]\)00*\.\./\10000000../
	/^index/s/\.\.00*$/..0000000/
	/^index/s/\.\.00*\([^0-9a-f]\)/..0000000\1/

after the above two patterns help?

Yeah, something like that though matching the beginning and end of the
line for the beginning and end of the hashes wont work. I'll reroll with
something similar

Thinking about it some more, just using your last three patterns should
do the job. - I'll test and reroll.

Thanks

Phillip